Full text of "The Great Commentary Of Cornelius À Lapide: I Corinthians, Volume 7"

See other formats

This is a reproduction of a library book that was digitized
by Google as part of an ongoing effort to preserve the
information in books and make it universally accessible.

Google" books

http://books.google.com

LIBRARY OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

Digitized by Google

Catholic StanOarb library

VOLUME SEVEN

THE GREAT COMMENTARY

CORNELIUS A LAPIDE

Digitized by G.ooQle

Digitized by

THE

GREAT COMMENTARY

CORNELIUS A LAPIDE

TRANSLATED AND EDITED

BY W. F. COBB, D.D.

•artON njva nwsr's

• A t » •« ' I - " «• •

I CORINTHIANS

EDINBURGH: JOHN GRANT

31 GEORGE IV. BRIDGE
1908

Digitized by Google

, 3

u.1

e °tV

Digitized by Google

EDITOR’S PREFACE

T N translating the Comments of Cornelius k Lapide on
-*• the First Epistle to the Corinthians, the Translator has
endeavoured, next to accuracy, to secure a reproduction of
the spirit of the Commentator.

The Translator, accordingly, has limited his efforts to a
reproduction of the matter, and as far as possible of the
form and spirit of the original, believing that most readers
would prefer to see for themselves what Cornelius k Lapide
believed to be the plain meaning of Holy Scripture, and
to appreciate the piety which he brought to its elucidation.
The only liberties taken with the original consist in an
attempt to shorten a little its terrible prolixity, and in the
correction of a few obvious mistakes in matters of fact.

W. F. C.

i895*

Digitized by C.ooQle

Digitized by

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE

CORINTHIANS

CHAPTER I

I After his salutation and thanksgiving , io he exhorteth them to unity , and 12
reproveth their dissensions . 18 God destroy eth the wisdom of the wise , 21 by
the foolishness of preachings and 26 calleth not the zoise, mighty , and noble %
but 27, 28 the foolish , weak t and men of no account.

P AUL, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and
Sosthenes our brother,

2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in
Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name
of Jesus Christ our lord, both theirs and ours :

3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord
Jesus Christ.

4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given
you by Jesus Christ ;

5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all
knowledge ;

6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you :

7 So that ye come behind in no gift ; waiting for the coming of our Lord
Jesus Christ :

8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the
day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus
Christ our Lord.

10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that
ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you ; but that
ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment
1 1 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are
of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul ; and I of
Apollos ; and I of Cephas ; and I of Christ
13 Is Christ divided ? was Paul crucified for you ? or were ye baptized in the
name of Paul ?

14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius ;

15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

VOL. I. A

Digitized by v^ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not
whether I baptized any other.

17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with
wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness ; but unto
us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to
nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise ? where is the scribe ? where is the disputer of this world ?
hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world ?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it
pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom :

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto
the Greeks foolishness ;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of
God, and the wisdom of God.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men ; and the weakness of God
is stronger than men.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the
flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise ;
and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which
are mighty ;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God
chosen, yea> and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are :

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption :

31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

CONTENTS

Achaia, or the peninsula commonly called the Morea, had in olden times several
famous cities. The metropolis of these was the celebrated emporium of
Corinth, famed, says Chrysostom, for its two ports, of which Lechaeum stood
on the Ionian and Schonus on the Aegean Sea. Hence poets, as, e.g . , Ovid
{Fasti iv.), frequently called it bimaris.

Corinth is said to have had its first foundation from Sisyphus, the robber son of
iEolus, and to have been called Corcyra (Strabo, lib. 8.), and afterwards
Ephyre. Having been destroyed, it was rebuilt by Corinth, son of Marithon,
or of Pelops, according to Suidas, or according to others of Orestes, and was
called after his name. Cicero, in his speech pro lege Manilid , calls this city
the light of the whole of Greece. Its natural position was so strong that the
Romans found great difficulty in reducing it.

I Corinth abounded in wealth, in merchandise of all kinds, and in metals, especially
brass or copper. This Corinthian copper was well known and in great

Digitized by

Google

SUMMARY OF THE EPISTLE

request ; so much so that Pliny {lib. iv., c. 2) says that it was reckoned equal
to gold or silver. From this wealth were derived the pride, gluttony, self-
indulgence, lust and ostentatious living of the Corinthians, and it became
a proverbial saying that it was not every man’s luck to go to Corinth.
Demosthenes replied to a harlot who asked for eight talents of gold as her
hire that he did not give so high a price for repentance. For the same
reason the Apostle is called upon to rebuke their vices, and especially
in ch. vi.

2 At Corinth flourished a large number of orators and philosophers, amongst

whom was Periander, one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece. Paul, we can
see, went to Corinth because it gave him so excellent an opportunity for
spreading the Gospel. There he converted many to Christ, by the help of
the Lord, who appeared to him in a vision at Corinth and said, “ Be not
afraid but speak, and hold not thy peace, for I am with thee and no man
shall set on thee to hurt thee ; for I have much people in this city.** Under
Paul’s preaching the Corinthian Christians made such progress that Paul
himself speaks (i. 5 ; xiv. 26) of their wisdom, prudence, gift of prophecy, and
other gifts bestowed on them by God.

3 From this there arose among the Corinthians pride, self-seeking, and strife, and

especially after the arrival of Apollos. Some then came to prefer him to Paul,
as a more polished and eloquent speaker. Thence came schisms ; while one
party would boast, “ I am of Paul,” and another, “ I am of Apollos.” This
caused Paul to write to them this Epistle, in which, through the first four chap-
ters, he tries to lead them away from pride in human wisdom and eloquence,
and from all contentious support of their teachers, Paul and Apollos, and to
bring them to the humility of the Cross, to the doctrine of the faith of Christ.

4 The Corinthians had written to Paul, asking him to resolve certain difficulties

they felt (vii. 1), which he does in this letter. After dealing in the first
four chapters with their schisms and striving after empty wisdom, he proceeds in
ch. v. to order the fornicator to be excommunicated, and in ch. vS., to rebuke
them for this sin of fornication, and for going to law before heathen judges.
In ch. vii. he answers their first question about matrimony and virginity,
and lays down the laws of Christian marriage, putting over against it and
before it the evangelical counsel of virginity and celibacy. Then in chs.
viii. and x., he deals with the question of eating of things offered to idols,
and lays down that such eating was lawful but needed caution, lest the
weaker brethren should be offended. In ch. ix., he shows how such offence
might be guarded against, and takes occasion to say that, out of regard for
his neighbour’s edification, he himself had abstained from receiving pay for
his own support, but had maintained himself, while preaching the Gospel, by
the labours of his hands. In ch. xl, he replies to their third question, one
concerning the veiling of women, as well as their fourth about the Eucharist
and Agapae. In ch. xii., he discourses of the gifts of the Spirit, pointing
out that different gifts were distributed by the Holy Spirit to different people.
Ch. xiii. dwells on the pre-eminent place among the gifts and graces of the
Spirit occupied by charity. Ch. xiv. is an answer to the fifth question of the
Corinthians, as to whether the gift of tongues was superior to the gift of
prophecy. He answers in the negative. Ch. xv. resolves their sixth doubt,
and gives manifold proofs of the resurrection, and describes its gifts, its mode,’

Digitized by Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

and order. In ch. xvi he orders a collection to be made for the poor saints
at Jerusalem, and he closes all with salutations.

5 Both this and the Second Epistle were written before that to the Romans ; for,
as Chrysostom points out, the collection which he orders here ( I Cor. xvi. 2),
he speaks of in Rom. xv. 25, 26, as having already taken place. The Greek
MSS. say that this Epistle was written at Philippi and sent by Timotheus,
and in this they are supported by the Syriac and the Regia Latina. But it
seems more likely from xvi. 8, and other passages, that it was written at
Ephesus (Acts xix. 1), in A.D. 57 (Baronius and (Ecumenius).

Ver. 1. — Sosthenes . He was chief ruler of the synagogue at

Corinth ; having been converted to Christ by Paul, he was severely
beaten for his faith before Gallio, the Proconsul (Acts xviii. 17), and
after his death was placed among the Saints. — November 28th.

Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are
sanctified in Christ Jesus , called to be saints [supply, Paul writes
and salutes in praying], grace be unto you and peace from God, For
called to be saints the Syriac translates, called and saints. For in
Greek it is not the participle Xeyoficvos or kckXi^i'os, ue ., summoned,
named, called ; but kXijt&s, a word which denotes having a call to
holiness, or holy by way of call, called to holiness.

Note first, that Paul throughout this chapter and everywhere else
holds up to admiration this benefit of calling. Secondly, that this
and all other benefits he, humbly and devoutly ascribes to the Divine
benevolence and to the power of humility. Chrysostom has here a
noteworthy passage in the moral part of his first homily.

TTiirdly, it is plain from this, in opposition to Pelagius, that, not
for our merits, but by the mere grace of God, have we been called
to the faith and the grace of Christ Again, that all Christians were
formerly called Saints : not because they were really so, but by way
of call, profession, duty.

Fourthly, he calls them saints in Christ, that is sanctified
through the merits of Christ, namely, in Baptism and its conse-
quent gifts.

Fifthly : “the church and the " called to be saints” are the same
thing. For the latter is in opposition and is explanatory of the
former : so that if you ask, What is the Church ? I shall answer from
this passage of S. Paul : It consists of those called to be Saints, or it

Digitized by Google

MEANING OF WORD * SAINT ” 5

is a congregation and assembly of the faithful, who have been called
to holiness.

Whence, sixthly, it is evident from here that the Church is visible ;
for Paul writes these things not to an abstract idea, but “to the
church which is at Corinth,” which was able to read and see his
letters, as is plain.

Seventhly, from this place it is evident that there is the same
Church everywhere, a part of which was the Church at Corinth.
Whence he says : “ With all that in every place call upon the name
of Jesus Christ our Lord \ both theirs and ours;” i.e, all Christians,
wherever they exist : whether with me in this place of ours, or in
any other place you please. Theirs , then, viz., of the Corinthians,
and ours, viz., of me and Sosthenes. He adds this, that no one
might suppose when he said Jesus Christ our Lord y that he meant
to say that Christ is the Lord of Paul and Sosthenes alone. So
Chrysostom says: “By this Paul tacitly enjoins the Corinthians
that they ought to lay aside contentions and to be of one mind, as
being members of the same Church, and of the same Head, Christ.”
Next, he reminds them that he writes this letter specially indeed to
the Corinthians, but, nevertheless, that he wishes it to be a circular
letter to all Christians, in the same way that the letters of the other
Apostles and of the Bishops in those first ages were circular letters.

Cajetan’s interpretation of “ ours” that it means, “ Our jurisdiction
extends itself to Corinth and to the Corinthians, so that the city and
district of Corinth is both theirs and ours,*’ is forced. Lastly, why
that is called the Church, or the summoning, or the assembly of
those called to the faith, which formerly was called the synagogue,
that is, the congregation ; and what it is, its nature and its marks, see
in Bellarmine in his sound and learned dissertation on the Church
(lib. i., c 1,2 et seq.)

Ver. 4. — I thank my God always on your behalf \ for the grace of
God which is given you by Jesus Christ “For the grace,” in Greek,
cVt T0 \dpvriy that is, on account of the grace of God, which is given
you in Christy i.e. y through Christ See Can. 25. “The source,”
says S. Bernard (, Serm . 13 in Cant.) y “of all the springs and rivers

Digitized by Google

6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

is the sea : but the source of all virtue and knowledge is the Lord
Jesus Christ : the continence of the flesh, the energy of the heart,
the rectitude of the will, all flow from that spring : let the heavenly
stream be given back to its source ” (by thanksgiving), “ so that the
farthest parts of the earth may be replenished ; * I will not give my
glory to another/ saith God ” (Isa. xlviii. n).

Ver. 5. — That in everything ye are enriched by Him (by Christ),
in all utterance (of the preaching of the Gospel), and in all know-
ledge, that is, in spiritual understanding of Him. In other words, I
give thanks to God, because by me and Apollos He put before you,
richly, the preaching and doctrine of the Gospel and a perception
and understanding of it.

Ver. 6 . — Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you —
i.e., by which, as by two testimonies, the Christian faith was founded
and established in you. For the Greeks interpret the Greek k* 0 w,
i.e., even as, by enallage, &*>’ through which, that is, the word and
knowledge. Others interpret, Even as the testimony , thus : by
which things, viz., by the preaching of the Gospel, and by the know-
ledge of it, as by a sure testimony, it is known that you are faithful
and disciples of Christ.

Ver. 7. — Waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, in His
second Advent, when you will receive from Christ an abundant
supply of all graces, and your consummation in heavenly glory.

Ver. 8. — Who shall also confirm you, so far as His part is ; i.e.,
shall give grace which can confirm you, and shall confirm you in-
deed, if you are willing to receive it, to use it, and to confirm your-
selves in the faith and love of Christ : shall confirm you, I say, for
this, that ye may be, and may persevere unto the end (of life) blame-
less; that is, unaccused, whom no one can charge with having
committed anything against the faith and love of Christ. The
Apostle speaks to the whole Church, in which the greater number
were holy and blameless, although some few were sowing schisms,
and these in the following verse he reproves and condemns.

In the day of our Lord Jesus Chgist It is an ellipse common
with the Apostle : for we must supply, that ye may be and may

Digitized by Google

GIFT OF PERSEVERANCE 7

appear , blameless in that day of the advent and judgment of
Christ

Ver. 9 . — God is faithful \ by whom ye were called unto the fellowship
of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Note, faithful with S. Paul is
the same as constant, truthful, as I shall show on 1 Tim i. 15 ; not,
according to Calvin, as though God saves those only who have been
effectually called by Him, and all of them ; and as though He bids
and makes each one of them believe with a firm faith that he will be
saved. For if so, why, in the next verse, anxious about the salva-
tion of the Corinthians, does he condemn their divisions ? Had not
the Corinthians believed ? — and yet, having lapsed into schisms, they
had incurred the danger of damnation, and, therefore, Paul en-
deavours to avert it from them. The faithful, therefore, can lapse
into sin and be damned. God, then, is said to be faithful, because,
not without cause, will He, O Corinthians, withdraw His help from
you which He began to give, and afterwards promised that He
would give, in order that you might persevere and be confirmed in the
faith and fellowship of Jesus ; nor will He desert you unless He be
first deserted by you ; as the Council of Trent teaches (following S.
Augustine), Sess. vi. c. 1 1 and 1 3, where it lays down the same three
things which the Apostle does here : (1.) That God gives the grace
of Christ to all the justified : because, if they are willing, they are
able to persevere in righteousness. (2.) That they by their own will
can fall from it (3.) That no one knows whether he will persevere,
and whether he is of the number of the elect, unless he has a
special revelation of it from God.

Note secondly. Paul here calls the communion of the faith,
grace and glory of Christ which is enjoyed in the Church of Christ,
the fellowship of His Son ; or that partaking of Christ in which we
have a fellowship of sonship, inheritance, the Sacraments, and all the
benefits of Christ In other words: Ye are called to be sons of
God, fellows, members, brothers, and co-heirs of Christ : so Anselm,
Ambrose, Theophylact and Chrysostom (whom see), and 1 S. John
i. 3. And here notice : although, as the Apostle says, all faithful
Christians are of the fellowship of Christ, yet some are more so than

Digitized by Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

others : that is to say, those who share more largely of the life and
grace of Christ : as those who follow, not only the precepts, but also
the counsels of Christ; even as the Apostles were more of the
fellowship of Christ than other Christians.

Ver. io. — I beseech you , brethren , by the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ , into whose one and the same fellowship, family, house, and
Church we are all called, as many as are faithful and Christians,
that ye all speak the same thing — that is to say, that, like brothers, ye
agree in words and in speech, and that ye all say at the same time
“ I am of Christ ; ” but let not one say, “ I am of Paul,” another, “ I
of Apollos.” And, again, that ye agree not only in speech, but also
in mind: otherwise your verbal confession would be feigned and
false. Whence he adds as the root of concord : —

That ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same
judgment , that ye think the same thing and agree among yourselves
in Christ, that ye be fitly united to each other in one mind and
spirit in Christ For the Greek signifies, aptly and harmoniously to
join and cement anything, so that the parts agree with each other
and with the whole. And because a thing is then perfect and
complete when it has in this way been neatly and harmoniously
united, hence the word signifies also to perfect, as Ps. viiL 2 ; 2 Cor.
xiii. 11. Be perfect , /.<?., mutually agree amongst yourselves and
with your Head ; and Ps. xl. 6 (Sept.).

Ver. 11. — For it hath been declared unto me by them of Chlol '.
Some think that Chloe is the name of a place, but this place is
nowhere else mentioned ; nor does the Greek well allow Chloe
to be a place. Whence more truly Chrysostom and the Syriac
suppose it to be the name of a family or of a woman, and then
the meaning is, I have heard from the family of Chlol. By a similar
Greek idiom it is said, Rom. xvi. 10, 11 : “Salute thetn which are
of Aristobulus, of Narcissus,” viz., of the house and family.

Ver. 12. — That every one of you; i.e., Whoever of you contend
with one another, and foment any part of schism. (For there were
among the Corinthians many others well-disposed and peaceful,
unconnected with schism, and consequently with the following

Digitized by Google

SCHISMS AT CORINTH

words) : says , in turn, alternately or respectively ; for not each one
was saying, I am of Paul \ / of Apollos y I of Cephas , but in turn ;
since one would say, I am of Paul \ another, I of Apollos , a third,
I of Cephas . In the words “ every one,” therefore, there is a dis-
tributive and disjunctive force familiar to the Hebrews; for every
one ambitiously and contentiously was saying, “ I am of Paul,” &c.,
I am of Paul, viz., a disciple, a catechumen ; I of Cephas, that is
to say, taught or baptized by the Blessed Pontiff Peter at Antioch,
at Rome, or elsewhere. For Peter bad not yet been at Corinth, as
is deduced from ch. iv. 15. Whence Baronius thinks that these are
the words of those who were avoiding divisions, which had properly
arisen because of Paul and Apollos, as appears in ch. iii. 4, and that,
to escape from them, while others were boasting of their teachers,
they would declare they were the disciples neither of Paul, nor of
Apollos but of Peter, the head of the Church ; as though they should
say, “This man says and boasts that he is the disciple of Paul, that
man of Apollos ; but I say that I am of Cephas, that is, that I am
a disciple of Peter, who is the head of the Church, and the Vicar
of Christ: for to him I cling, in him I glory; he converted and
baptized me by Paul or Apollos or some other.” Whence another
rising higher would say : “ I am of Christy who is the supreme Head
of Apostles and of the Church, whose Vicar Peter is, whose
ministers are Paul and Apollos.” For it is to be noted that he adds
1 am of Christ as the words of those who speak not amiss but
rightly, if there is no contention and contempt of the Apostles and
the Vicars of Christ, as the Anabaptists now despise Prelates; for
it became all to say, “ We are of Christ,” viz., Christians ; whereas
some called themselves disciples of Paul, or of Apollos, or of
Cephas. So Ambrose, Theophykact, S. Thomas. The occasion
of the schism seems to have been that Apollos, who was eloquent,
acute, and learned in the Scriptures, was then teaching at Corinth
(Acts xviil 27), and compared to him S. Paul seemed to some
cold and bald, because he avoided in his preaching all display of
knowledge or of rhetorical ornament, as he says himself (ch. ii. 4.)

Lastly, S. Jerome (on Tit. i.) gathers from this passage that

Digitized by Google

10 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

Bishops were given jurisdiction over presbyters, so as to remove
all scandals, and that the Church before this was governed by the
Presbyters in common council. This opinion must be discussed
when we come to the Epistle to Titus.

Ver. 13. — Were ye baptized in the name of Paul t Christ is one,
and in His name all were alike baptized. In vain then, he says, do ye
contend for us, which of us is to be the greatest, when we are but the
ministers of baptism. Hence, theologians teach that the validity of
Baptism and the other Sacraments depends not on the disposition of
the receiver, or of the minister, but flows from the Sacrament itself.

Note 1. that to be baptized in the name of Christ is the same as
to be baptized in the invocation, profession, power, merit, and
baptism of Christ, and so to have a right to the name of Christ.
Therefore we are called Christians from Christ, and not Paulians,
or Apollinians. For the power of excellency which Christ has in
Baptism and the other Sacraments, see S. Thomas.

2. S. Thomas and others, as well as the history of the Greek
Church, show that that Church uses as its form of Baptism, not
“I baptize thee,” but “Let the servant of Christ be baptized in
the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,” so that
no one can say, “ I am of Paul,” or “ I am of Apollos.”

3. Erasmus, Faber, and other innovators, wrongly argue that
by parity of reasoning it is wrong to say, “I am of Scotus,” and
“I of Thomas;” “I am a pupil and follower of Francis,” “I of
Dominic;” because the Apostle is only censuring contentions for
the pre-eminence, and the schisms of which some at Corinth
boasted, and which divided the Church into hostile factions: so
that they attributed the power and excellence of Baptism and of
the faith not to Christ, but to Paul or Apollos. But this is no
condemnation of monastic institutions, or of the schools and
academies of the philosophers and theologians; for though they
differ from one another in their customs, their rites, and opinions,
yet they are joined together in the same faith, the same Christian
charity and humility. If any one does otherwise, his religion will
be vain, and we will hand over his vanity and contentiousness to

Digitized by Google

DIVERSITY IN UNITY

be corrected by S. Paul with that of the Corinthians. This is the
sin of the individual, not of the Order ; as in this chapter it is the
sin of individual Corinthians that is dealt with, not that of the
Church. Far more truly and suitably may we use this passage
against the schisms of modern innovators. For they say, “ I am
of Calvin,” or “ I of Luther,” or “ I of Menno,” and this in matters
of faith and religion. For Calvin teaches one faith, Luther another,
Menno another. But the diversity of Religious Orders makes for
the greater beauty, strength, and unity of the Church; just as a
camp is beautified, strengthened and united by the due distribu-
tion of its legions. For without this distribution it would be in
confusion.

The religious of the various Orders are united not only under
one head, the Supreme Pontiff, in the one Church, but also by
their living under the same Order, whether their state be lay or
cleric. For the Religious Orders make, as it were, one legion in
the Church, and that its strongest one. As, then, the members of
the same body are joined in one, and as the soldiers of the same
legion are more united to one another than the soldiers of different
legions, so the Religious who are aspiring to the height of perfec-
tion are bound together more closely than all others by the bond of
religion and of prayer to God.

If there is any amongst them who calumniates, envies, opposes
another Order, that man’s religion is vain ; he is not a Religious,
nay, he is not a Christian, but a heathen ; he is not led by the Spirit
of God, but by that of the devil. For the true Religious says with
S. Bernard in his Apology, “For one Order I work ; to all others I
show charity .” In work, I am a Franciscan, in charity a Dominican,
an Augustin ian, a Benedictine, &c. And therefore I am a religious
of all Orders; I have work for one, charity for all. Therefore
I rejoice in the good of all Orders : I am pleased at the prosperity
of all, I envy none. For all are mine, and I belong to all. Is
Christ divided in the different orders? God forbid. For the
same Christ is the Institutor, Author, and Governor of all Religious
Orders, and that makes for their greater concord. Let not then

Digitized by Google

12 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

that which ought to be the cause of greater harmony be the
cause of the most disgraceful division, which is hateful to God,
lest we hear the words, “Whereas there is among you envying
and strife and divisions, are ye not carnal?” And again, “ Is thine
eye evil because I am good?” If it has pleased God to add
Order to Order, to raise up new ones to supplement the old, to
give them fresh supplies of His grace and of His Spirit, who can
find fault with God? who can envy the new Orders? who deprive
the Church of such workmen? Suppose that they do carry off
the prize ; I will rejoice that God is honoured through them, and
that more souls are saved ; and may I be a sharer of their labours,
for I seek not mine own glory, but that of God.

Ver. 1 6 . — And I baptized also the house of Stephanas. Stephanas,
says Theophylact, was a well-known inhabitant of Corinth, whose
faith and charity are praised by S. Paul (ch. xvi. 17).

Ver. 17. — For Christ sent me not to baptize , but to preach the
Gospel. Preaching and the administration of the Sacraments are
the two duties of Pastors, but especially the former. And there-
fore the chief work of Bishops, Archbishops, and Primates is to
preach the Gospel: and this they are bound to do themselves,
unless lawfully hindered (Council of Trent, Sess. v. c. 2, and Sess.
iv. c. 4). But they may with Paul intrust the administration of
Baptism and the other Sacraments to Parish Priests and their
assistants.

Not with wisdom of words. I.e., with eloquence and rhetorical
adornment, not according to the Gospel. The Greek word for
wisdom gives us Sophists, the Greek orators who particularly
pleaded in the law courts. Of this kind are modern innovators
in religion, who rightly style themselves “ministers of the word.”
Not so did Paul, “ lest the cross of Christ should be made of none
effect? i.e., should become emptied of its force, by men supposing
that they had obtained salvation, and their belief in the faith
through human eloquence, instead of by the power of the Passion
of Christ This was the origin of the schism of those who said, “ I
am of Paul,” “I of Apollos,” because the eloquence of Apollos

Digitized by Google

WISDOM AND FOLLY

was pleasing to some of the more fastidious Corinthians, and to
those who loved eloquence ; while on the other, Paul pleased those
who sought for the spirit rather than the words, inasmuch as he was
unskilled indeed in rhetoric but not in knowledge. And thence
it is that S. Paul here and in the next three chapters attacks and
abases in different ways eloquence and worldly wisdom. The
“wisdom of words” can be taken for natural philosophy, or the
wisdom of human reason ; for it is opposed to the Cross in ver. 18 ;
and again, in verses 19, 20-27, he explains it as philosophy and
human reason and prudence. (Maidonatus.)

Ver. 18. — For the preaching of the Cross is to them that perish
foolishness . Any declaration about the salvation bestowed by the
Cross, or about our redemption by the Cross and Passion of
Christ, seems foolishness to men who are sceptical and perverse,
and therefore ready to perish. Isaiah, too, says this in the person
of Christ: “Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath
given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel ” (Isa. viii. 18). See
also Heb. ii. 13.

Ver. 19. — For it is written. This is from Isa. xxix. 14, where,
following the Hebrew, the verbs are intransitive. S. Paul quotes
from the Septuagint, where the verbs are transitive, but the sense is the
same. Note that Paul refers to the whole circle of worldly wisdom
what the Prophet said of the wisdom of the Jews alone, which was
Pharisaic. For both are alike in this connection, and the meaning
is, “ I will make men unwilling to use worldly wisdom for their
salvation, but only the Gospel and the Cross of Christ.”

Ver. 20. — Where is the wise ? The Gentile philosopher.

Where is the scribe t The Jewish doctor. S. Paul is quoting Isa.
xxxiii. 18.

Note, as the Greeks called their wise men philosophers, and
the Chaldeans theirs magi, so the Jews called theirs sopharim ,
“scribes.” “Scribes” is from the same root as “Scripture,” and
implies that they were occupied with the Holy Scriptures. Their
duty, in fact, was to preserve the Holy Scriptures in their integrity,
to carefully correct aU transcripts, to interpret them by writing and

Digitized by v. ogle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

by word of mouth, and to write out or state the answers they gave
to questions about the Law. (Epiphan. hares. 16).

Where is the dispufer cf this world f The student of physical
science who narrowly investigates the secrets of nature and the
world. In other words, philosophers and scribes have been cast
aside, and all the wise of this world thrown down and put to
confusion by the preaching of the Apostles, by the glory of the
Gospel. (So S. Chrysostom.)

Paul here and in the following verses is aiming at philosophers
both ancient and modem, and not at such Christians as Dionysius
the Areopagite, Hierotheus, Paul himself, Clement of Rome,
Nathanael, Gamaliel, Apollo’s, as the Anabaptists seem to think.
He has in his mind the Gentile teachers who at this very time
were going round the world, like rivals to the Apostles, and under
the garb of piety, wisdom, and eloquence were attempting to attract
to themselves, and away from the Apostles, the various nations, as
though they alone taught true wisdom, and the way to virtue,
righteousness, and salvation; as, e.g, Musonius, Dio, Epictetus,
Damys, Diogenes Minor, Apollonius of Tyana, who was greatly
looked up to by the Greeks at that time because of his mystic
powers, and was given a statue at Ephesus, and placed among the
gods. (Baron ius, Annals, a.d. 75.)

Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world f I.e., has
shown to be foolish : a manifestation of its true nature is described
as if it were a change of its essence. It is foolish, he says, seen in
the light of the Cross and of Christ and of salvation. The light
of this knowledge requires faith, not subtlety. S. Ambrose says,
“ The knowledge of fishermen has made foolish the knowledge of
pihlosophersf since it has surpassed their limits, and the limits of
nature.

So, too, did God by His creative work show the folly of the
saying of the philosophers, that “Out of nothing nothing comes,”
and that in consequence the universe was uncreate and eternal. So
in His Incarnation did He show the folly of the saying, “ God
cannot be contained by a body, time, and place ; ” and in His

Digitized by Google

DIVINE WISDOM

Passion the saying, “God cannot suffer and die.” So in the
Eucharist He shows the foolishness of their principles and of those
of our modern innovators who say, “An accident cannot exist
without a subject ; a body cannot be in a point ; two bodies cannot
be in the same place at the same time.” For though these things
are out of Nature’s reach, yet they are not impossible to God, who
is Omnipotent, and transcends all nature.

& Paulinus quotes this passage of S. Paul’s in a letter (27) to
Aper, who had been a lawyer and then had embraced the
monastic life, and was, therefore, exposed to ridicule. From this
he confirms him in his purpose, and shows him how to despise the
laughter and sneers of men. “ I congratulate you,” he says, “on
having scorned that wisdom which is rejected of God and on having
preferred to have fellowship rather with Christ's little ones than
with the wise of the world. It is from this that you have merited
the grace from God of the hatred of men ; this would not be had you
not begun to be a true follower of Christ” And a little lower, in
showing the fruit and dignity of his purpose, he says, “ Rejoice
and be exceeding glad , for great is your reward in heaven ; for it is
not you that they hate , but Him who has begun to be in you, whose
work is in you, whose humility they despise, whose holiness they loathe .
Joyfully recognise yourself to be a sharer in this good with Prophets
and apostles. From the beginning of the world Christ has ever
suffered and triumphed in His own : in Abel He was killed by His
brother ; in Noah He was mocked by His son ; in Abraham He
was a pilgrim; in Isaac He was offered up ; in Jacob He served ; in
Joseph He was sold; in Moses exposed and forced to flee ; in the
Prop Juts stoned and persecuted ; in the Apostles tossed about on sea
and land; in His Martyrs often slain and in different ways . In
you, too. He suffers reproaclus, and this world hates Him in you ; but
thanks be to Him that He overcomes when He is judged and triumphs
in us. n Again, praising and admiring his change of life, he says,
“ Where tiow is the once feared advocate and judge t Would that
I had wings to fly to you, to see you no longer yourself, but changed
from a lion to a calf— to see Christ in Aper, who has now laid aside

Digitized by Google

1 6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

his ferocity and strength , and become a lamb unto God instead of a
wild-boar of this world. For you are a boar , but of the corn-field ,
not of the forest ; you are rich in the good fruit of holy discipline , , and
have fed yourself with the fruit of virtues”

Ver. 21. — For after that in the wisdom of God the world by
wisdom knew not God \ it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching
to save them that believe. Mark the phrase, “ in the wisdom of
God.” God shows His wisdom in the marvellous structure and
government of the world, as S. Thomas says. In other words, the
world in its foolishness knew not God practically in His wisdom
stamped on His Creation, as the Author of its salvation, and
Leader to a life of bliss ; nor yet speculatively , because philosophers
regarded God as powerless to create; they thought Him to act
under necessity, and to be void of providence, &c.

Hence it is that God has revealed Himself and His salvation
to the world in a way which seems to the world foolishness, viz.,
by the Cross. He has thus stooped to men, and become as it were
foolish among them ; just as a teacher will sometimes act as a boy,
and talk as a boy, amongst boys. So Christ, because He was not
understood as God, revealed Himself to men, as a man, and one
liable to suffering. This is wisdom unspeakable. See S. Thomas,
Anselm, and others.

Ver. 22. — For the Jews require a sign . . . but we preach Christ
crucified. A Theban, when asked what he thought of the Romans,
said that “the Romans boasted themselves in their spears, the
Greeks in their eloquence, the Thebans in their virtues.” But the
Apostle says that he and other Christians boast themselves in
Christ crucified. This is our spear, our eloquence, and our virtue.

Ver. 23. — Unto the Jews a stumbling-block , , and unto the Greeks
foolishness. Notice here, with S. Chrysostom {Horn. iv. moral in
loco , and above on ver. 17), that the power of the Cross shines forth
not only in itself but also in its preaching: (1.) In the fact that the
Apostles, few in number, simple fishermen, poor, unlearned, unknown,
and Jews, in all these respects hateful to the world, yet brought the
tvorld into subjection to the Cross. (2.) In the fact that they sub-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

POWER OF THE CROSS

titled most bitter enemies, demons, sin, death, hell, kings, princes,
philosophers, orators, Greeks, barbarians, laws, judgments, longr
existing religions, and time-honoured traditions. (3.) In that they
persuaded men by simple preaching, and not by arms, wisdom, or
eloquence. (4.) In that in so short a time they spread the faith of
Christ over the whole world. (5.) In that by the grace of Christ they
overcame most cheerfully and courageously what is hardest to be
borne by the natural strength of man, the threats of tyrants, scourg-
ings, deaths, and tortures. (6.) In that they preached a doctrine not
about a glorious God, but a crucified One, and Him their Saviour to
be believed in and adored; and a law of Christ displeasing to
nature and flesh. Wherefore Tertullian {lib. contra Jud.) beauti-
fully and fitly compares the Kingdom of Christ with the kingdoms
of all kings and people, and prefers it before them all : “ Solomon ,”
he says, “reigned, but only in the borders of Judcea from Dan to
Beersheba : Darius reigned over the Babylonians and Parthians , but
not further ; Pharaoh reigned over the Egyptians , but over them only .
The kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar stretched only from India to
Ethiopia. Alexander of Macedon, after subduing all Asia and other
countries , could not keep what he had conquered . So have the Germans ,
Britons , Moors , and Romans bounds set to iluir dominions . But
the kingdom of Christ has reached to all parts , His name is believed
on everywhere, is worshipped by all nations , everywhere reigns, is
everywhere adored; He is equal to alt. King over all. Judge over all,
God and Lord of all.”

Ver. 25. — Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the
weakness of God is stronger than men. That is, say Ambrose and
Anselm, the foolishness and weakness of God, or what men think is
foolishness and weakness in God and in Christ incarnate and suffer-
ing, as eg.. His humanity, mortality, Passion and Cross, was just
that by which Christ, when seemingly conquered, yet most wisely
and most powerfully conquered men, Satan, and the whole world.
In other words, God’s wisdom and power were most plainly seen in
His overcoming all wisdom and strength by what was foolish and

weak, viz., the Cross. And therefore Jerome and S. Augustine
vol. 1. B

Digitized by Google

l8 FIRST EPISTLE TO TIIE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

explain the passage of Habakkuk (iii. 4) <c He had horns coming out
of His hands f thus : The strength and weapons by which, as by horns,
Christ slew His foes were the arms of the Cross to which the hands of
Christ were nailed. Hence it is that the Cross in the sky appeared
to Constantine the Great as he was going to battle against Max-
entius, with the inscription, “ In this sign thou shalt conquer ”
(Euseb., Life of Constantine, lib. i. c. 22).

Literally and morally the power and wisdom of the Cross are seen
(1.) in that on the Cross God showed His supreme love to us, that so
He might draw us to Him ; for God, under no necessity, with no
prospect of advantage to Himself, of His own will stooped to the
Cross from love of man, solely. This He yet did with such wisdom
that no damage was done by it to the loftiness and glory of His
Godhead; for the Godhead in Him suffered nothing,* but He bore
all His suffering in the Manhood which He had assumed. (2.) In that
on the Cross He redeemed man, not by the power of His Godhead,
but through the righteousness and humility of His Passion, as S
Augustine says. (3.) In that on the Cross He set before us a most
perfect example of obedience, constancy, endurance of punishment,
patience, fortitude, and all virtues, as well as mortification of vices.
(4.) In that on the Cross He condemned the wisdom and pride
of the world, and gave to man, who had fallen through pride and
self-indulgence, a mirror of life, viz., a mode of recovery through
humility and the Cross. (See also S. Thomas. 3, p. qu. 46, art 3 and
4, and S. Augustine, De Trin . lib. xiii. c. 12.)

S. Bernard, in his exhortation to the Soldiers of the Temple (c. 11),
says : " The weakness of Christ was no less beneficial to us than His
majesty ; for although the power of His Godhead ordered the removal
of the yoke of sin , yet the weakness of His flesh destroyed by death the
rights of death over man . And therefore the Apostle beautifully says:
4 The weakness of God is stronger than men.' But His foolishness by
which He was pleased to save the worlds so as to confute the wisdom
of the world \ and to confound the wise ; which made Him , though He
was in the form of God and equal to God \ empty Himself and take
upon Him the form of a servant ; by which, though he was rich, He

Digitized by Google

THE "FOOLISHNESS OF THE CROSS

yet for our sake became poor , though He was great He became little ,
though He was high yet He became humbled \ though He was powerful
He became weak ; through which He hungered \ thirsted, \ and was
weary on the journey , and suffered all that His oivn will and no
necessity laid upon Him ; this foolishness of His> was it not to us the
way of prudence , the form of righteousness , the example of holiness t
Therefore the Apostle also adds , i The foolishness of God is wiser than
men . 9 Death then set us free from deaths life from error , grace from
sin. And truly His death won the victory through His righteousness ;
because the Just One , by paying what he never took 9 rightly recovered
all that He had lost : 9

Hence it is that Francis and the greatest Saints have sought to be
considered foolish by the world, in order that they might the rather
please God. Some religious Orders, indeed, so regard this as the
height of perfection and Christian wisdom that they enjoin their
members to love, desire, and embrace contempt, ridicule, insults, and
injuries, and to long to be considered fools, just as eagerly as worldly
men seek for a reputation for wisdom, for honour, and renown.
They do this to teach them in this way (1.) to utterly despise the
world ; (2.) to humiliate themselves and uproot their innate desire of
honour, praise, glory, and high position ; (3.) to be more like Christ,
and to clothe themselves with His garments and His marks, who
for our sakes, and to give us an example of virtue and perfection,
chose these things Himself, willed to be considered foolish, and
became a scorn of men, and the outcast of the people. They say,
therefore, with S. Paul, “ God forbid that I should glory save in the
Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified to
me and I to the world.”

All this does the Cross of Christ teach if you often meditate on it ;
nay, the Cross is the fount of wisdom. S. Bonaventura, when asked
where he had drunk in so much wisdom, showed a crucifix almost
worn away by kisses. S. Jacoponus, a man of good birth and of
great learning, after having learned from the Cross of Christ to
become foolish to the world, was asked by Christ, who appeared to
him in a friendly and familiar way, why he was so enamoured of

Digitized by Google

20 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

this foolishness, and he answered with his customary pious pleasantry,
“Because Thou, Lord, hast been more foolish than I.” In short,
S. Chrysostom (. Horn , 4 on the Cross and the Robber ) sums up the
power and praise of the Cross as follows : “ If you wish to know the
power of the Cross , and what I have to say in its praise , listen .* The
Cross is the hope of Christians , the resurrection of the dead \ the way of
them that despair ; the staff of the lame, the consolation of the poor, the
curb of the rich, the destruction of the proud, the punishment of them
that live badly, victory over the demons, subjugation of the devil, the
instructor of the young, nourishment of the needy, hope of the hopeless,
the rudder of seafarers, haven to the storm-tost, wall to the besieged,
father of the fatherless, defender of widows, counsellor of the just, rest
to the weary, guardian of little ones, head of men, end of the aged, light
to them that sit in darkness, the magnificence of kings, an everlasting
shield, wisdom of the foolish, liberty to the slaves, a philosophy for
kings, law to the lawless, the boast of martyrs, the self-denial of
monks, the chastity of virgins, the joy of priests , the foundation of the
Church, the destruction of temples, the rejection of idols, a stumbling-
block to the Jews, perdition to the ungodly, strength to the weak, phy-
sician to the sick, bread to the hungry, water to the thirsty, clothing
to the naked, 1 *

Ver. 26. — For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many
wise men after the flesh, not many mighty , not many noble are called.
The for gives the reason of what had gone before. This verse
contains another proof of what was said in ver. 21, “// pleased
God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe n
for this is proved in two ways: (1.) in ver. 23, from the
object of preaching, viz., the Cross, by which God was pleased
to save the world, but which to the world seems foolishness;
(2.) from the ministers of preaching, viz., the Apostles, whose
duty it was to preach salvation through the Cross, and who were
men of no account, unpolished, despised, and foolish in the eyes
of the world.

Again, the particle for fitly joins this verse to the preceding ; ver.
25 gives an indefinite and general statement which is true, not only

Digitized by Google

THE CHRISTIAN PREACHER

of the Cross, but also of the preachers of the Cross, as Athanasius
points out (Ad Antiockum , qu. 129).

This particle, then, declares the likeness of the Apostles to the
Cross that they preached. It is as if S. Paul had said : God willed
to use the foolishness and weakness of the Cross, and with it to
overcome and subdue to Himself the wisdom and power of all men ;
and we see -this, not only in the Cross itself, and its victory, but
also in the Apostles who preach the Cross : for God has not chosen
the wise and powerful of this world, but the Apostles, who are poor,
simple, and foolish in the eyes of the world, that they might carry
the banner of the Cross on high throughout the whole world, and
bring all men into obedience to the faith of the Cross, and that
they all might believe and hope for their righteousness and salva-
tion through the Cross of Christ

It is a reason drawn from likeness or analogy. For such as the
Cross was — worthless, despicable, and foolish before the world — such
should be all preachers of the Cross. For God in His wonderful
wisdom has so well adapted everything to the Cross, which is the
burden of all preaching, that not only the preachers but believers
too should be like the Cross; for the first who were called to the
faith were men of low birth, of no reputation, unknown, sinners,
publicans, and harlots.

Ye see your calling. The reason and mode of your calling.
Because the Apostles who called you are not wise, according to
this worlds wisdom, which knows not that which is spiritual and
Divine. So S. Thomas applies the words to the Apostles, who
called others. S. Chrysostom, however, applies them and rightly
(from ver. 2) to those who had been called and converted; for
many unlearned had been converted to Christ, and but few who
were learned and nobly born. The words, then, mean : Ye see of
what kind are both callers and called.

Some wise and powerful, of course, were called, as, e.g., Dionysius
the Areopagite, Paulus the Proconsul, Nicodemus, S. Paul himself,
but they were few. Moreover, the Apostle is speaking mainly of
the Apostles, who were the first called, though they were poor and

Digitized by Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

of no reputation. And therefore S. Ambrose (on S. Luke, c. vi. 13),
says : “ See the counsel of God \ He chose not the wise , the rich the
noble, hut fishermen and publicans to train , that He might not be
thought to have drawn any to His grace by His wisdom , to have
redeemed us by His riches , to have won us to Him by the influence of
poiver or birth; and that so, not love of disputation , but truth by its
reasonableness might prevail I” S. Augustine (vol. x. Serm . 59) says,
u Great is the mercy of our Maker. He knew that if the Senator
were chosen, he would say, * I was chosen because of my rank/
If the rich man were chosen, he would say, * I was chosen for my
wealth/ If a king, he would put it down to his power; if an
orator, to his eloquence ; if a philosopher, to his wisdom. * For
the present,* says the Lord, * those proud men must be rejected :
they are too haughty. Give Me first that fisherman. Come, poor
man. You have nothing, you know nothing; follow Me. The
empty vessel must be brought to the plentiful stream/ The fisher-
man let down his nets ; he received grace, and became a Divine
orator. Now while the words of the fishermen are read, orators
bow their heads in reverence.” It seems, therefore, that what
some fable about the royal birth and renown of the Apostle
Bartholomew is groundless.

Ver. 27. — But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to
confound the wise . The words " foolish, weak, base,” form a climax,
and are used by S. Paul to describe the faithful who had been called
to Christ, or rather the Apostles themselves, who had called them.
He contrasts them as uncultivated, poor, base, and hence fbolish in
the eyes of the world, and the world’s laughing-stock, with the wise, •
strong, and powerful of the world.

Things which are not This is applied to the same persons as
being contemptible and reckoned of no account In other words,
God chose the despised Apostles, who were thought nothing of,
that He might destroy, and, as it were, bring to nought things that
are, i.e., which are highly esteemed, as e.g., the wise and mighty
of the world.

Observe that three things which the world is wont to admire, viz.,

Digitized by Google

STRENGTH IN WEAKNESS

wisdom, power, and birth, were passed over by God when He called
men to faith, righteousness, and salvation ; and on the other hand
that three things opposite to these were chosen by Him, viz., want
of wisdom, of power, and of birth. This was done to show that the
work was from God, and that this calling was to be ascribed to the
grace of God, and not to human excellence. Thus, in the second
century after the Apostles, He chose Agnes, a maiden of thirteen
years, who amazed and confounded her judges and all the heathen
who saw her by her wonderful fortitude. Well, therefore, does the
Collect for her day run : “ Almighty and everlasting God , who

choosest the weak things of the world to confound the strong, merci-
fully grant that we who keep the Feast of Thy Virgin and Martyr
S. Agnes , may receive the fruit of her prayers ” Such too were SS.
Agatha, Lucy, Dorothy, Barbara, and a countless number of others
whom God seems to have raised up to show the power of His grace
in their weakness. Therefore in their Collect the Church prays:
“ O God \ who, amongst other marvels of Thy power, hast also con-
ferred upon feeble women the victory of martrydom, mercifully grant
that we, who keep the * birthday 9 of Thy blessed Virgin and Martyr,
N., may by her example come to Thee.”

Ver. 30. — But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus. By the gift of God
Himself, by His grace, were ye called to believe in Christ So
Anselm. To be in Christ is to have been incorporated with Him in
Baptism, or to be in the Church of Christ, and in Christianity.

Who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sancti-
fication and redemption. This righteousness, say our modern inno-
vators, is imputed, because it is ours, not substantially and inherently,
but is merely the external righteousness of Christ imputed to us;
before God we seem righteous. But I reply : If this be true, then
in the same way the active redemption wrought by Christ, which
S. Paul here joins with righteousness, will be imputed to us, and
consequently we shall be redeemers of ourselves, which is absurd.
In the second place, wisdom is infused into us, and so is faith, and
so therefore is righteousness ; for the Apostle classes together the
righteousness and wisdom of Christ as both alike ours.

Digitized by Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO TIIE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

I say, then, with Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm, Ambrose,
and S. Thomas, that the sense of this passage is this : Christ is made
unto us the author and cause of real Christian wisdom, redemption,
sanctification, and righteousness.

i. By way of satisfaction and meritoriously ; and this is what the
Apostle specially has in his mind here : because Christ paid man’s
debt with the most precious price of His own Blood, and so made
satisfaction for man, and merited for us righteousness, wisdom, and
sanctification. In this way He was made for us righteousness,
because the righteousness, i.e., the satisfaction of Christ, is ours, just
as much as if we had ourselves made satisfaction to God. And hence
it is that theologians teach that the satisfaction of Christ is applied
to us in justification through the Sacraments, as if naturally first, and
that then as a natural consequence our sins are forgiven through
that satisfaction, and grace is infused. This condemns the error of
Peter Abelard, in which he is followed by the Socinians, who teach
that Christ was the teacher of the world, not its redeemer — nay more,
that He was sent by the Father to give to man an example of perfect
virtue, but not to free him from sin or to redeem him. S. Bernard
refutes this in Ep. 190, to Pope Innocent, where he says: “ Christ
is the end of the law to every one that believeth. In short, S. Paul
says that He was made to us righteousness by God the Father . Is
not then that righteousness mine which was made for met If my
guilt is brought against me, why am I not given the benefit of my
righteousness t And indeed what is given me is safer than what is
innate. For this has whereof it may glory, but not before God \
But the former, since it is effectual to salvation, has no ground of
glorying, except in the Lord \ i For if I be righteous, yet will I
not lift up my head , 9 says fob, lest the answer come, 1 What hast
thou that thou didst not receive t But if thou didst receive it, why dost
thou glory as if thou hast not received it l 9 This is the righteousness
of man in the blood of his Redeemer, which Abklard, that man of
perdition, scoffs and sneers at, and so tries to empty of its force, that
he holds and argues that all that the Lord of Glory did in emptying
Himself ... in suffering indignities . . . is to be reduced to this.

Digitized by Google

CHRISTIAN RIGHTEOUSNESS

that it was all done that He might by His life and teaching give
to man a rule of life , and by His suffering and death set up a goal
of charity” Abelard’s argument was fallacious and frivolous: the
devil, he said, had no right over man; therefore man needed
no liberator. The premiss is doubtless true when understood of
lawful right, but not of usurped right, under which man through
sin by his own free will had submitted himself to the power of the
devil, of sin, and of hell.

2. By way of example ; because the righteousness of Christ is the
most perfect example, to which all our righteousness ought to be
conformed. In this sense S. Paul’s meaning is, Christ is an example
and mirror of righteousness.

3. Efficiently; because Christ effects and produces this right-
eousness in us through His Sacraments, and because He teaches
the Saints true wisdom and understanding; as, eg how to live a
good and Christian life, by what road to attain to heaven, and how
wejnust strive after bliss.

4. As our end ; because Christ Himself and His glory are the
end of our righteousness and sanctification. S. Bernard, in his
22nd Sermon on the Canticles, deals with these four, wisdom ,
righteousness , sanctification, , redemption , symbolically. In the first
place, he adapts them to the four works of Christ. He says, “ Christ
was made for us wisdom in His preaching , righteousness in the
forgiveness of our sins , sanctification in the life that He spent with
sinners , redemption in the sufferings that He bore for sinners” And
again further on he says, “ Christ was made for us by God wisdom
by teaching prudence , righteousness by forgiving us our trespasses ,
sanctification by the example He set of temperance and of chaste life ,
redemption by the example He left of patience and of fortitude in
dying. Where f I ask , is true wisdom^ except in the teaching of Christ l
Whence comes true righteousness but from the mercy of Christ ?
Where is there true temperance but in the life of Christ l Where
true fortitude save in the Passion of Christ t ”

In the second place, S. Bernard naturally adapts these four to
the four cardinal virtues, prudence, justice, temperance and forti-

Digitized by Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. I.

tude, which Christ imparts to us. He goes on to say: “ Only

those, then, who have been imbued with His doctrine are to be called
prudent ; only those, who by His mercy have obtained forgiveness of
their sins, are to be called righteous ; only those are to be called
temperate who strive to imitate His life ; only those are to be called
brave who bravely bear adversity and show patience like His. In
vain surely does any one strive to acquire virtues, if he thinks that
they are to be obtained from any other source but the Lord of virtues,
whose teaching is the school of prudence, whose mercy the working of
righteousness, whose life the mirror of temperance, whose death
the pattern of fortitude!

Ver. 31. — That, according as it is written. He that glorieth, let
him glory in the Lord. He is quoting not the words but the sense
of Jeremiah ix. 23. So Ambrose, Theophylact, Anselm, St. Thomas.
In Jeremiah the passage runs : “ Thus saith the Lord, Let not the
wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory
in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches, but let him
that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth Me.”
This it is to glory in the Lord. Jeremiah is speaking of liberation
from the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, and from slaughter by the Chal-
deans, which were then threatening the Jews. In other words, then,
he says : The Jews glory in the counsels of their wise men, in the
strength of their soldier?, in the riches of Jerusalem, as though these
would make them secure against the Chaldeans ; but they err, for
their true glory is to know and understand God, that is, His Provi-
dence, and that it is He alone who worketh mercy, and mercifully
sets free whom He will, and not the wisdom, might, or riches of
man. Moreover, He alone inflicts just punishment on whom He
will, and no wise, mighty, or rich man can set free from this — even
as, O Jews, He will inflict it on you, and will bring it to pass, that
death (that is, the Chaldeans, shall bring death upon you) shall
climb up into your houses, through your windows, and slay all your
little ones.

The Apostle rightly adapts this in this passage to those who were
calling others, or who had been called into Christianity, that no one

Digitized by Google

THE RULE OF GLORYING

may attribute the grace of Christ to himself, his virtues, or the gifts
of nature, but only to Christ, and consequently his tacit exhortation
is : “ Do not, O Corinthians, glory in yourselves, or in Paul, or in
Apollos, your teachers, but in the Lord alone.” For this is what in
the beginning he proposed to prove, and therefore all that is here
said must be referred to it. Anselm says : “ That man glories in
the Lord only who hnows that it is not of himself but of Him, not
only that he is, but also that it is well with him” Again, that man
glories in the Lord who, if he has anything which makes him pleas-
ing to God, holds that he has received it, not because of his own
wisdom, power, good works, talent, or merits, but merely through
the grace of God. Thirdly, he who in ail that he does seeks not
his own glory, but that of the Lord.

S. Bernard wrote a noteworthy sermon on these words of the
Apostle; see also Sermon 25 on Canticles. He says: “ Moreover ,
the whole glorying of the Saints is within and not without, that is, not
in the flower of grass, or the mouth of the vulgar, but in the Lord; for
God alone is the sole judge of their conscience, Him alone they desire
to please, and to please Him is their only real and chief glory” And
Sermon 13 on Canticles: “ Brothers , let none of you desire to be

praised in this life . For whatever favour you gain for yourselves
here which you do not refer to Him, you steal from Him. For
whence, thou dust that perishesi, 7 uhence comes thy glory ? ” And in
his Sentences : “ The Apostle knew that glory properly belongs to the
Creator, and not to the creature . But he also knew that the rational
creature so seeks after glory that it can scarcely or perhaps never
overcome this desire, just because it was made in the image of the
Creator. Therefore he gave most wholesome advice when he said:
‘ Since you cannot be persuaded not to glory, let him that glorieth
glory in the Lord l ” Let us, too, say in company with the Psalmist,
u Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto Thy name give the
praise,” and with the four and twenty elders who cast their crowns
before the throne, “Blessing and honour and glory and power be
unto Him that sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb for ever
and ever” (Rev. v. 13).

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER II

He declareth that his preaching, I though it bring not excellency of speech , or of
4 human wisdom : yet consist eth in the 4, 5 power of God: and so farexcelleth
6 the wisdom of this world, and 9 human sense, as that 14 the natural man
cannot understand it.

A ND I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or
of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.

2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and
him crucified.

3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.

4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's
wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power :

5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power
of God.

6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect : yet not the wisdom
of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought :

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdoMt
which God ordained before the world unto our glory :

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew : for had they known #, they
would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered
into the heart of man, the tilings which God hath prepared for them that
love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit : for the Spirit searcheth
all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man
which is in him ? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of
God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which
is of God ; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom
teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth ; comparing spiritual things with
spiritual.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God : for they
are foolishness unto him : neither can he know them , because they are spiritually
discerned.

15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of
no man.

16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?
But we have the mind of Christ.

Digitized by Google

S. PAUL’S MANNER OF PREACHING

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

He proceeds to exalt the spiritual wisdom of Christ above all natural and animal
wisdom. Therefore he says : —

L That he knew and preached nothing but Christ crucified ; and that not
with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the
Spirit and of power.

iL Nevertheless in ver. 5 he says that he speaks wisdom among them that
are perfect, wisdom hidden from the world, which eye hath not seen
nor ear heard, but which the Spirit of God alone has revealed.

iii. He shows in ver. 14 that the natural man does not perceive the things
which are of God, but the spiritual man perceives and judges all
things.

Ver. 1 . — And I, brethren , when I came to you , came not with
excellency of speech or of wisdom. The Apostle here descends from
the general to the particular. In other words : I said in the pre-
ceding chapter that God in preaching the Gospel willed not to use
the wisdom of the wise in this world, but rejected it and scorned it,
but willed by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe ;
and therefore He chose not many noble or wise to spread the Gospel,
but the low-born and untaught Apostles. From this I infer and say
“ And t.e., and so I as one of the number of the Apostles, who,
according to the election and will of God, did not use eloquence
and worldly wisdom, was unwilling to use those means, and I came
to you not in excellency but in simplicity of speech and wisdom.

Ver. 2 . — For I determined not to know anything among you save
Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Mark the word determined : it is
as if he said, I did not think of, I did not value any knowledge save
that which is of Jesus crucified, our Saviour, and, therefore, I so
bore myself among you, as if I knew nothing of human wisdom,
although I have much acquaintance with it, for on other occasions
I can quote the Greek poets ; but with you I kept it back, that like
the others I might merely preach with all simplicity Christ crucified.
Not that I did not preach the other mysteries of the faith, but I
especially taught you and impressed on you that we must glory in
the Cross of Christ only, and hope from it for our righteousness and
salvation, and, as Anselm says, must imitate the cross and crucify

Digitized by Google

30 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

our vices. For in Christ crucified it is easy to see, besides other
things, that Christ chose and embraced these three, viz., utmost
pain, the greatest poverty or nakedness, and the lowest depths of
shame. Christ by His pains crucified and taught us to crucify the
lust of the flesh; by His poverty He crucified the lust of the
eyes or avarice ; and by His shame He crucified the pride of life.
These are the three heads of the world's sin, and the sources of all
sins. (See i S. John ii. 16, and what was said about the Cross in
c i. 23).

Ver. 3. — And I was with you in weakness: that is, in anxieties,
tribulation, and persecution ; and in fear and much trembling, because
of the hostility of the persecuting Jews and Gentiles. S. Chrysostom
and Anselm remark that the Apostle in his Second Epistle (xi. 30
and xii. 5, 9, 10), and elsewhere, gives the name of weakness to the
anxiety he suffered from dangers, plots, exile, daily terrors, calumnies,
and hatreds. And also, that Paul suffered great anxieties and per-
secutions at Corinth, is evident in that he needed to be strengthened
against them by Christ in a vision (Acts xviii. 9). Moreover, shortly
afterwards the Jews there stirred up a tumult against Paul, and
dragged him to the judgment-seat of Gallio, the deputy of Achaia,
and publicly beat Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, before
him.

Ver. 4 . — And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing
words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.
Speech (\6yos) denotes his private and familiar conversation as
contrasted with his public preaching. S. Thomas and the Glossa
distinguished the two words in this way ; so does Seneca, who, in Ep .
38, says : “ Conversation , because it makes an impression on the mind
by little and little , is of immense force. Speeches prepared and delivered
to a large assembly have more vehemence but less familiarity .” S. Paul’s
conversation, then, as well as his preaching, was not with enticing words
(/>., apt to persuade) of man's wisdom. In such the orators and
philosophers at Corinth surpassed S. Paul. Paul, however, had to
make the Corinthians believe a new philosophy by a new mode of
speech and action, and in this he excelled all orators and philo-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

HOW CHRIST SHOULD BE PREACHED

sophers, viz., in demonstration of the Spirit and of power . So
Sulpicras testifies that S. Martin once said that “the kingdom is not
founded on eloquence but on faith.” S. Augustine, too, in his
Sermon 1, about those coming to grace, says : “ We do not try to
persuade you with thundering words and flowery phrases , nor by any
rhetorical skilly nor by eloquence darkened by set speeches such as the
world uses, but we preach Christ crucified.” And in lib. ii. c. ii., against
Felicianus, he says : “/ will never rely on wisdom of words, lest the
Cross of Christ be shorn of its power ; but lam content to rely on the
authority of the Scriptures, and 1 am more anxious to obey simplicity
than presumption

This, then, was the demonstration of the Apostles, viz., to show
(1.) burning zeal and a spirit giving forth wisdom and revealing
secrets, not human but Divine, so that the hearers might perceive
plainly that the Holy Spirit was speaking by their mouth ; (2.) great
powers, that is prodigies and miracles. Therefore Origen (lib. i. contra
Celsum) says : “ Our mode of teaching has its own proper demonstra-
tion, which is more Divine than that of the Greeks, and which is called
by the Apostle , * the demonstration of the Spirit and of power . 9 The
Spirit lends faith to those things which are said about Christ in the
Prophets ; ami the power is seen in the miracles which we believe to have
been wrought” Origen here understands the work of the Spirit some-
what differently, but his explanation is not so much to the point as the
one given above. For, as (Ecumenius says, “ The demonstration which
comes by works and signs is surer than that which depends on words.”
This was the Apostolical mode of preaching, and a far more effectual
way than that which modern preachers put before themselves for imi-
tation. Their style was not adorned, clouded over, and tainted with
enticing words of man’s wisdom, but was in demonstration of the Spirit
and of power. So wilTApostolic men go forth, and their words, like
fiery arrows, will pierce men’s hearts, and like hammers break in
pieces the rocks. Listen to S. Jerome (Ep. ii. to Nepotianus ) : “ Let
not the applause of the congregation be aroused by your teaching in
church , but their groanings. Let the tears of the hearers be the proofs
of your success.” This spirit, as well as the fruit of preaching, must

Digitized by Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

be obtained by prayer to God. Hence Origen (< contra Celsum , lib. Vi.);
in quoting these same words of the Apostle, says : “ What else is the
meaning of these words but that it is not enough that what we say is
true and fit to stir the hearts of men ? the teacher must have a certain
power given him from above , and his words require the energy of Divine
grace , as David says , * The Lord shall give the word to those that preach
with much power”* (Ps. Ixvii. Vulg.).
t Ver. 5. — That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but
in the power of God . Our preaching is to be of the kind just men-
tioned, so that your faith, i.e., your conversion to the faith of Christ,
may not be attributed to human wisdom and eloquence but to the
power and working of God. Your faith must be based on God’s
wisdom not on man’s. (Anselm and others.)

Ver. 6 . — Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect.
This wisdom that he speaks among the perfect, that is, the faithful,
is Christian wisdom, and is concerned with the Cross of Christ, with
grace, salvation, and the eternal glory won for us by Christ. And
although the * faithful ” are simple, yet in the things which belong
to salvation they are wiser than Aristotle or any other philosopher.
So SL Chrysostom and Anselm. Moreover, those who have not
only been born again by baptism, but also confirmed by the Sacra-
ment of Confirmation, have obtained the Christian perfection, and
are perfectly made Christians. For this reason S. Dionysius and
others call the Sacrament of Confirmation “the perfecting,” and
they call those confirmed “the perfected.” Irenaeus implies the
same (lib. v. c. 6), when he says : “ We speak wisdom among them
that are perfect \ that is, those who have received the Holy Spirit, and
by that Spirit speak all tongues just as S. Paul did.**

Secondly and more simply, wisdom here denotes the more hidden
and deeper mysteries of the faith, such as the Resurrection, Anti-
Christ, Reprobation, Predestination; or a more profound and thorough
explanation of the things of faith, such as the mode, counsel, and
end of the Incarnation, Passion, and Redemption of Christ; for
so S. Paul explains wisdom in the verses immediately following.
He does not speak and discourse of this wisdom to beginners,

Digitized by Google

WISDOM TRUE AND FALSE

but to those who have advanced and are perfected. Hence in
ver. 15, he calls the perfect “ spiritual,” and contrasts them with
the natural man, with children and carnal men. He is here im-
pressing on them that, though he may seem to have no human
wisdom, yet he has Divine ; that although he has given to them,
as to children, milk, that is, simple and easy teaching (iii. a), yet
amongst the perfect he speaks of hidden and Divine wisdom.

The Apostle by these words defends his authority over the
Corinthians, who, after hearing Apollos, an eloquent and learned
speaker, seemed to hold S. Paul in little esteem, as a speaker
without eloquence or skill.

Yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world.
Anselm, Ambrose, Cajetan, and others understand the devils by
the princes of this world, inasmuch as they have their power over
the air, the ungodly, and the children of this world And they prove
from here that the devil, before the Passion of Christ, although he
knew that Christ was God, yet did not know that by His death his
own empire was to be destroyed, and men redeemed (vex. 8). This
is true, but it is truer still when understood of men.

Secondly, S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm, Tertullian (contra
Marcion , lib. iii. c. 6), Origen (Cant. Nom. 2) understand by the
princes of this world the leaders who excel their fellows in wisdom,
wealth, or power. And therefore S. Paul adds, that come to nought , ,
*>., are done away with, pass by, disappear. These, too, crucified
Christ (ver. 8). Such were Pilate, Herod, Annas, Caiaphas,, and the
other princes of the Jews and Gentiles.

Ver. 7 . — But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery. ( 1 . ) This is
a Hebraism for “the wisdom of the mystery,” that great secret of the
Divine counsel, about the Incarnation of the Word, and the redemp-
tion of man by Christ, which cannot be attained to by man by any
effort of reason — no, nor yet by the angels, as is clear from Eph. v. 4, 5.
Hence, in 1 Tim. iii. 16, this wisdom of the mystery is called the
great mystery of godliness. So Theophylact, Ambrose, (Ecumenius,
commenting on this verse, and Jerome and Leo Castrius on Isa.

Ixiv; also S. Leo. (2.) We may understand this wisdom to be con-

VOL. L C

Digitized by Google

34 * FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

cerned with the greatness of the glory of the Blessed, for this was
the end of the Incarnation and suffering of the Word.

Secondly, it is simpler to connect the words “ in a mystery ” with
“we speak” rather than with “wisdom.” Then the meaning is, we
speak secretly and to a few, viz., those who are perfect, the spiritual,
of this deeper and more hidden wisdom. Hence Ephrem and
Tertullian render the passage : “ We speak of the wisdom of God
in secret.” Hence also S. Dionysius and others have written books
on mystic theology.

Ver. 8 . — Which none of the princes of this world knew. The
pronoun is better referred to glory than to wisdom, and the sense
is : if this wisdom, or rather this glory and its being predestined in
Christ, had been known by Pilate, Annas, Caiaphas, and the other
princes of the world, they would never have crucified the Lord of
Glory, viz., Christ, by whose merits this eternal glory was predestined
and prepared for us from eternity. Gabriel Vasquez comments well
on this passage {lib. i. disp. 2, c. 3). The Apostle tacitly implies
that none other of the princes of this world knew this glory and
wisdom of Christ. For, d fortiori \ the Jews were wiser than the
Gentiles, especially in Divine things ; if, therefore, they did not know
it, much more were the others ignorant of it

Ver. 9. — But, as it is written , eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God hath
prepared for them that love Him . After “ but ” there is an ecthlipsis,
and we must supply, “this wisdom and the glory which was its end
were hidden from them,” as it is written, &c. He then quotes Isaiah
Ixiv. 4.

1. Isaiah, in the passage quoted, is speaking of the Incarnation
of Christ and of this present life. And hence Chrysostom,
Ambrose, Theophylact, CEcumenius take this verse of the miracles
of Christ, and of the wisdom, virtues, and grace which Christ by
living here on earth has imparted to us.

2. It is more agreeable to the context to say that Isaiah seems to
fly away in admiration from the Incarnation and manhood of Christ
to the celestial glory, which is the fruit and end of the Incarnation

Digitized by Google

THE BLISS OF HEAVEN

of Christ; for such flights and sudden changes are common with
the Prophets, because of the sublime and ample light of prophecy
which they enjoyed.

This appears from the words used ; as, e.g., “ Him that waiteth for
him,” and “ Thou meetest him that worketh righteousness .” He is
speaking then of the fruit of the works of the just, viz., the eternal
life which we wait for; for the fruit of the Incarnation and faith
does not meet them that work righteousness, but those that are
sitting in darkness and sin. So says S. Jerome (in Isa. lxiv.),
S. Dionysius (He Ccelest \ Hierarch. 12), and Vasquez, in the pas-
sage above quoted. Hence S. Bernard ( Serm . 4 on the Vigil of the
Nativity) says : “ Eye hath not seen that unapproachable light \ ear
hath not heard that incomprehensible peace . ... And why is it
that it Teas not ascended into the heart of man f Surely because it is a
spring and cannot ascend. For we know that the nature of springs is
to seek the rivers in the valleys , and to shun the tops of the mountains ;
for God resisteth the proud \ but giveth grace to the humble .”

S. Augustine, inhis “Meditations,” ch. 22 etseqq., and “Soliloquies,”
ch. 35 and 36, discourses most beautifully about the greatness of
this bliss. The author too of the book on “The Spirit and the
Soul” (which is found in vol. iii. ch. 36 of S. Augustine’s works),
very appropriately says on this passage of the Apostle: “As the
outward man is affected by temporal things through his five senses , so
the inward man , in the life of bliss , is affected by the five ineffable
attributes of God through his ineffable love for Him. For when he shall
love his God \ He will know him as a certain light \ a voice , a sweet
odour , a food \ and an inward embrace. For there shines the light
which no place can contain ; there sounds the music which no time steals
away ; there is the sweet odour which no wind can scatter; there is
the food which is eaten and yet undiminished ; there clings to us the
good which knows no satiety ; there is God seen without intermission^
known without error , loved without disgust , and praised without
wearying .”

These words of the Apostle were once the occasion of the con-
version of S. Adrian, and made him a martyr. He was a soldier

Digitized by Google

36 iFIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

and in the flower of his age, viz., twenty eight years old, and when he
beheld the constancy of the Christian martyrs in the tortures that they
had to endure for the faith of Christ, he asked them what they ex-
pected in return for such sufferings, what enabled them to overcome
such tortures. They replied, “ We hope for those good things which
eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the
heart of man, which God hath prepared for them that love Him. 1
By these words Adrian was touched and converted, and he hastened
to get himself enrolled in the list of martyrs, and eagerly bore a
cruel death at Nicomedia, with his wife Natalia looking on and
encouraging him. This was a.d. 306, under Diocletian.

3. The meaning of this passage will be complete if you com-
bine the two interpretations given above thus : Those good things
which Thou, God, through Christ, hast prepared for them that wait
for Thee, surpass all our senses, experience, natural understanding,
and all human desire, not only in this life in the case of those who
have already caught some sounds of Thee, but also chiefly and most
properly in future glory. There will God, who is Himself all that
good is, give Himself to the blessed, and will be as all in all, a a
Anselm says. For by these words of Isaiah, the Apostle proves what
he had said, viz., that the wisdom as well as the glory of Christ was
secret and hidden, as we saw above.

Neither have entered into the heart qf masK Has not come into
the mind of man : no man can by nature think of or understand
them. The heart with the Hebrews stands for the mind For
what the heart fa to the body — its chief and noblest part, the
source and principle of life — that fa the mind to the souL Moreover,
the heart supplies the brain with its vigour, and so fa a kind of
handmaid to the imagination and consequently the understanding.
Hence Aristotle, though against Galen and all other physicians*
placed the apprehension of external objects not in the brain but in
the heart He distinguished the vital organs of man by their
functions in these verses :

“ The heart gives wisdom, the lung speech, and anger comes from the bile.
The spleen is the cause of laughter, and love comes from the liver.' 9

Digitized by

Google

THE DEEP THINGS OF COD

Where Isaiah has “them that wait for Thee,” S Paul has "them
that love thee* The sense is the same, for love is one cause of
expectation.

Ver. ia — But God hath revealed them unto us by His Spirit. S.
Paul here anticipates an objection. It might be said," If eye hath
not seen, neither have entered into the heart of man, the wisdom and
the glory that Christ has prepared for His friends, how is it that yon
boast yourself of its possession ? 99 Paul replies that he knows them
not by sight, sensation, or by the understanding, but by the inspira-
tion and revelation of God. Hence, Clement of Alexandria ( Peedag .
lib. Lc.6) interprets the phrase, " ear hath not heard, * by adding,
“except that ear which was taken up into the third heaven,* vis.,
Paul’s, who heard with the ear in Paradise mystic words which it is
not lawful for a man to utter. Paul means, then, that God has
revealed these things to us His Apostles and Prophets filled with His
Spirit, in order that we may teach you and others. It appears from
this that not only is our longing for bliss and glory supernatural,
but that our knowledge of them is also, whether that knowledge
be of them in their essence, or merely the obscure and fragmentary
knowledge of the Apostles and of all others who are still "in the
way.* Consequently there is not naturally in man any perfect and
effectual desire, or appetite, for this bliss.

The Spirit searcheth all things , yea, the deep things of God. That
is, penetrates into and perceives everything. For when men want to
learn something of which they are ignorant, they are wont to search
and inquire about it But God, without any such searching, knows
everything at a glance, and as it were by a single application of Hit
mind. (S. Thomas, Theodoret, Theophylact.)

The deep things of God are all the most secret and inward
counsels of God. Amongst them the chiefest is this mystery of
man’s glory and redemption by Christ. All these the Holy Spirit
penetrates into and clearly views, because He is of one essence and
knowledge with God, and therefore He so "searches the deep things
of God,* that nothing in God remains unknown to Him. His
knowledge and sight equal their object, and He knows God as He

Digitized by Google

38 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

can be known ; the Holy Spirit, because He is God, compre-
hends God and His Divinity as completely as He comprehends
Himself. (Molina part i. qu. 14, a. 3, Theodoret, S. Thomas.) From
this passage Ambrose and other Fathers prove the Godhead of the
Holy Ghost against the Macedonians. To sura up S. Paul’s mean-
ing : The Holy Spirit has revealed to us these mysteries and secrets
of God : He knows all the secrets of God, and therefore He searches
and clearly views the deep things of God.

Ver. 11. — What man knoweth the things of a man t Those in the
inner recesses of his being, which are buried in his heart and mind,
as, e.g, his thoughts, resolutions, and intentions, and the foundation
of the character itself.

Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God , .
The Holy Spirit knows them as well as Himself. For the Holy
Spirit is internal to God, just as the spirit of a man is internal to
him ; and as the spirit of a man is a sharer of his humanity, so the
Spirit of God is a partaker of Godhead, and of the Divine omni-
science and power. “The things of God* are those which are
hidden in the mind of God — the thoughts, counsels and determina-
tions of the Divine WilL

After “knoweth no man, but the Spirit” must be understood,
“and He to whom the Spirit has willed to reveal them, as to me
and the other Apostles,” as was said in ver. 10.

“No man, but the Spirit” does not exclude the Son. For since
He is the Word, He knows the deep things of God. For in Divine
things, when an exclusive or exceptive word is applied to one Person
in respect of the Divine attributes, it does not exclude the other
Divine Persons, but only all other essences from the Divine, i.e., it
only excludes those whose nature differs from that of God. The
meaning then is : No one knows the secret things of God, save the
Spirit of God, and they who have the same nature with the Spirit,
the same intellectual and cognitive powers, viz., the Father and the
Son. These alone know the deep things of God.

Ver. 12. — Now we have received not the spirit of the world but the
Spirit which is of God, He contrasts the spirit of the world with

Digitized by v^,ooQle

DIVINE WISDOM

the Spirit which is of God, claims the latter for himself and the
Apostles, and assigns the other to the wise men of this world. The
spirit of the world, therefore, is that which is infused by the world,
by worldly and carnal wisdom, which aspires after worldly, earthly,
and carnal goods, and makes men worldly and carnal. On the
other hand the Spirit of God is that which is infused by God and
Divine Wisdom, which makes us pursue heavenly and Divine goods,
and makes men spiritual and heavenly. Therefore the Apostle adds —

That we might know the things that are freely given to us by God.
On this passage the heretics found their peculiar belief that each
Christian knows for a certainty that he ought by heavenly faith to
believe that he has through Christ had given to him by God the
forgiveness of his sins, with grace and righteousness, and as Calvin
says, that he has been chosen to eternal glory. But this is not faith,
but a foolish and false presumption, not to say blindness ; because
we do not certainly know that we have been duly disposed for
righteousness, and whether we surely believe, and as we ought; nor
is it anywhere said or revealed in Holy Scripture that I believe as I
ought to do, or that I am righteous or one of the elect The best
answer to them is the sense of the passage, which is this: The
Holy Spirit shows and reveals to us what and how great are the gifts
given to us, the Apostles, by God, and to others who love God — so
great indeed that eye has not seen them, nor have they entered into
the heart of man ; for the Apostle looks back to ver. 9.

I say, then, that the Apostle is speaking in general terms of
the gifts which were given to the Apostles and the Church, and
of those gifts alone. He says in effect: “We received this Spirit
that we, i.e. y the Apostles, might know with what gifts and good
things in general Christ has enriched us, i.e., His Church, viz., with
what grace of the Spirit, what redemption, what virtues, and
especially with how great glory;” for these were the things alluded
to in ver. 9 ; and these things are, as he says in ver. n, in God, i.e. t
by the free-will and predestination of God. “ We know, too, through
the Holy Spirit and Revelation, that these things have been given
by God to the Church ; for we speak of and teach these things as

Digitized by v^,ooQle

40 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

part of the faith. But that I am possessed of them, or a sharer
in them, is not a matter of faith, but of conjecture : it is not to be
publicly preached, but secretly hoped for.”

Again, the word know may be taken in a twofold sense : (i.) Ob-
jectively ; (2.) Subjectively.

1. Objectively, the Apostle knew, and all the faithful knew, from
the prophecies, miracles, and from other signs from God, that He
had promised to His congregation (/.*., His Church, which had been
called together by the Apostles, and was afterwards to be called
together), and that, according »to His promises, He had given His
grace, forgiveness of sins, righteousness, and other gifts of free
grace, and lastly a sure hope of eternal life. But all this was
to His Church in common, not to this or that individual in it;
for we cannot know in a particular case whether this one or that
is faithful. In this sense the word know is the same as believe.
For we believe that the Catholic Church is holy, and that in
her there is forgiveness of sins and everlasting life. God, there-
fore, has only revealed that His Church is holy, but not that I am
holy. For although He has revealed and has promised to all in
the Church, who rightly believe and repent, forgiveness of sins and
righteousness, yet He has not revealed that I believe truly and
repent; and therefore He has not revealed that my sins are for-
given, and that I am justified.

2. The word know may be taken subjectively : we Apostles know
by experience what wisdom and grace God has given us; and in
this way the word know is the same as experience. For no one of
the Apostles believed by faith from above that he had wisdom and
grace ; but he experienced the acts and effects of grace in himself
so vehemently, frequently, clearly, and surely, that he felt morally
certain that he had true wisdom and grace from God. For the
Apostles were filled with grace and wisdom, and it behoved them
to teach others the same, and wholly to long to bring the world to
Christ Although, then, the Apostles knew by experience that they
had been justified and sanctified, still the rest of the faithful did not
know it, nor do they know it now. They can only hope so, and con-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

KNOWLEDGE OF SALVATION

. 41

jecture it from the signs of an upright and good life. Yet neither
the Apostles, nor they, believe it on the testimony of infused faith ; for
experience of every kind merely generates human faith, not Divine :
that springs from and depends on the revelation of God alone.

Ver. 13. — Which things also we speak , not in the words which
meats wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth. I.e., not
in words taught by Cicero, Demosthenes, or Aristotle, such as
human wisdom teaches, but in words inspired by the Holy Ghost.

Comparing spiritual things with spiritual In other words, we
teach this spiritual wisdom from the Scriptures and other spiritual
writings, and do not base it on philosophical, rhetorical, or earthly
reasons, ideas, or speeches, as S. Chrysostom says. CEcumenius
says : M If we are asked whether Christ rose on the third day, we
bring forward testimony and proofs from Jonah If we are ashed
whether the Lord was bom of a Virgin, we compare His mother
in her virginity to Anna and Elisabeth in their sterility, and thence
prove it* The Apostle here gives 4 priori the cause and reason
why, at God's command, he refrained from using eloquence and
human wisdom in his preaching. The reason is that Divine and
human wisdom so widely differ. Since, then, speech should be
fitted to the subject-matter, it was evidently right that that speech,
by which Divine wisdom was published, should be adapted to it,
and should differ from the words of human wisdom — that is to say,
that it should be simple, grave, efficacious, and Divine, as proceeding
from the Holy Spirit, who would reject all rhetorical ornamentation.
In this matter we are bidden to learn, forbidden to use ornament.
For as words of human wisdom carry with them the wisdom and
the spirit of the speaker, so do the words of the Holy Spirit bring
into the soul the wisdom of God, and of His Spirit speaking by
the Apostles.

Ver. 14. — The natural man recetveth not the things of the Spirit of
God. Natural or animal is here applied to one who follows his
senses and the unaided light of reason. He is one who is concerned
with this life only, and thinks after the way of this life, who follows
the objects of his sensations and the thoughts of his heart. Such

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

were the Apostles before they received the Holy Spirit, and such
were the Corinthians at this time, as they sought after eloquence.
Now, too, there are many of the faithful, not bad men, who do not
seek after higher things.

The word animal here comes from “ anima, w and has a threefold
application, (i.) It is applied to one who grows, takes nourishment,
and needs food, as all animals do. So Adam, though created in
grace, is called animal [natural] ( i Cor. xv. 45, 46). (2.) Secondly,
to one who follows his nature, i.e., his lusts and desires. So the
Jews are called animal or natural, as not having the Spirit
(3.) To one who follows after knowledge that is not spiritual
and sublime, but open and easy to the mind and senses. This
is the meaning here. Bernard, or whoever is the author of the
treatise on the solitary life, says, a little after the beginning of it :
“ The natural state is a mode of life subservient to the senses of the
body, viz ., when the soul \ as though going outside herself pursues ,
by means of the bodily senses , the pleasure she finds in the bodies
she loves , feeds on the enjoyment they give , and nourishes her own
sensual disposition; or when, as though returning to herself on
finding that she is unable to bring to the place where her incorporeal
nature is the bodies to which she has joined herself by the powerful
bonds of love and habit, she brings with her images of them, and holds
friendly conversation with them . And when she has accustomed her -
self to them, she thinks that there is nothing save what she left
behind her without, or herself brought within, Thenccforivard , as

long as she remains here, she finds her pleasure in living accord-
ing to the pleasures of the body ; but when she is prevented from
enjoying them, she has no thoughts but stub as are images of bodily
things.”

So he is called spiritual who lives in the Spirit :

1. As a spirit not needing food, so Christ lived after His resur-
rection (1 Cor. xv. 45).

2. As following the inspiration, direction, and movements of the
Spirit

3 As drinking in the heavenly teaching of the Spirit Such

Digitized by v^,ooQle

NATURAL AND SPIRITUAL

a one is called spiritual by S. Chrysostom, S. Thomas, and others.
S. Bernard, in the place just quoted, writes : “ The state of begin-
ners may be called natural \ of those who are advancing rational \ of
those who are perfect spiritual 1 For they are natural who by them-
selves are neither led by reason nor drawn by affection , and yet are
influenced by authority , or touched by doctrine , or provoked by example
to approve , and strive to imitate the good. They are rational who
through the judgment of reason have some knowledge and desire of
good y but have not yet any love of it. They are perfect who are led
by the Spirit , who are illuminated by the Holy Spirit more fully , and
derive their name of * the spiritual * from this. And since they know
the taste of the goody and are led by their love for it, they are called
the wise , or those who know Then in comparing these three, and
forming of them steps, and a ladder of virtues, he goes on to say :
“ The first state has to do with the body, the second with the soul , the
third finds no rest but in God. The beginning of good in conversion
is perfect obedience , its advancement is the subjection of the body , its
perfection is to hovel turned through continued good actions custom into
love. The beginning of the rational is to understand those things
which are put before it in the teaching of faith, its advancement is
marked by the providing of those things which are enjoined, its per-
fection is seen in the judgment of the reason becoming the love of
the heart. The perfection of the rational is the beginning of the
spiritual ; its advancement consists in seeing the glory of God with
unveiled face ; its perfection is to be changed into the sa?ne image from
glory to glory as by the Spirit of the Lord.”

Because they are spiritually discerned, i.e,, according to the rules
given by the Holy Spirit and the canons of faith. Some read, he is
spiritually discerned, which would mean that he is invited, by being
examined, to spiritual and heavenly wisdom. When he is being
instructed in spiritual matters, or when spiritual things are put be-
fore the natural man, and when the natural man is questioned about
spiritual things, he cannot understand them.

Ver. 15 . — But he that is spiritual judgeth all things. He is called
spiritual, as we have seen, who follows faith and wisdom and the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. II.

teaching of the Holy Spirit, who has the Holy Spirit as the ruler
of his soul. So Chrysostom, Anselm, S. Thomas.

Juigeth all things . i. Hence Calvin and the Anabaptists make
the private and fanatical spirit of each spiritual man, £*., each one
of the faithful, the arbiter of controversies of faith, and the inter-
preter of Scripture ; but wrongly, for all Christians are not spiritual,
but only the perfect, as was said at ver. 14.

2. Others cannot know whether a man has this spirit, whether he
is spiritual, nay, whether he is even faithfuL Therefore this private
and secret spirit cannot be the public judge of all things ; but this
is the province of Councils and the Pope. For it is known that
these are spiritual, that they are governed by the Holy Spirit, who
appointed them teachers, and by them governs and teaches the
Church.

3. The Fathers were spiritual to a high degree, and yet they
sometimes erred.

4. It is evident that the simple need the pastors and teachers
whom God has placed in the Church to teach others (Eph. iv. n).

I answer, then, that this passage means that the spiritual matt
judges things in general, spiritual things, Divine and heavenly things,
natural, earthly, and easy things; while the natural man judges
natural things only. This is that there may be a distribution
proportioned to dasses of individuals, and not to individuals of
different classes. So we say, 44 1 live on every kind of food,”
on any kind.

In the second place, to 4< judge all things” is to examine, confute,
and sift questions, according to the rules of the faith, and of the
Divine wisdom which the spiritual man has. Of course this is in
questions in which he has been sufficiently instructed from above,
as, eg., in clear and ascertained matters of faith he judges every-
thing according to the articles of the faith, and condemns heresies
and errors contrary to that faith. But if any new question in faith
or morals should arise, and it is obscure or doubtful, wisdom itself
dictates to the spiritual man, who in this question is not yet spiritual,
or sufficiently taught by the Spirit, to have recourse to his superiors,

Digitized by

Google

SPIRITUAL JUDGMENT

as the same Spirit teaches him, to the doctors, to his mother, the
Roman Church, that she may decide and define this question for
him. For she, according to the teaching of the Apostle, is plainly
spiritual, and judges all things by the direction and assistance of the
Spirit For Christ promised this to Peter, and in him to his suc-
cessors (S. Matt xviii. 18; S. Luke xxii. 32). They, then, are
highly spiritual, and they judge all things. It is different with those
beneath them, who, though they be spiritual, yet should often seek
the judgment of their superiors. Otherwise he who is spiritual
would never have to obey the decision of his father, or his teacher
or his bishop. In so for, then, as the spiritual man follows the
leading of the Spirit, either teaching him directly, or sending him
to the doctors of the Church, he cannot err. In the same way S.
John says that he that is born of God cannot sin (1 S. John iii. 9);
Lfi. t so far as he that is born of God abides in Him. So S. Thomas,
Ambrose, Anselm, Theophylact, Chrysostom. S. Paul's meaning,
then, is that the spiritual man judges well about the hidden
mysteries of the faith, and about things in general, and if he
doubts, he knows what to do, whom he ought to consult, so as
to receive instruction. So Aristotle {Ethics iii. 4) says, “A good
man rightly judges in all cases , and the virtuous man is the rule and
measure of all human things,” i.e., says S. Thomas, because he has
a well ordered judgment and good desires, obedient to law and
reason. Still, in difficult cases he ought to consult those who are
wiser and more skilled in the law.

Yet he himself is judged of no man, i.e., is confuted or condemned
by no one, in so far as he judges spiritually, as S. Chrysostom says.
For if otherwise, he is reproved as S. Peter was by S. Paul (Gal ii. 1 1).
On the other hand the natural man is spiritually examined and
judged by the spiritual, even though he does not know it or under-
stand it. For in this passage the whole endeavour of the Apostle
is to exclude human and worldly wisdom by spiritual, and to con-
trast the spiritual with the natural, and to put it first, since the
Corinthians did the opposite and therefore put Apollos before Paul.
He implies, therefore, that the Corinthians are natural, because they

Digitized by v^,ooQle

46 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, c. II.

sought after “enticing words of man’s wisdom,” such as they ad-
mired in the eloquence of Apollos ; and he says that they cannot
judge about spiritual things, and the spiritual wisdom of Paul, but
that he and men like him ought to judge both spiritual and natural
wisdom. This and nothing else is what the Apostle is aiming at.

Ver 1 6. — Who hath known the mind of the Lord t Since the
spiritual man has been taught by God and follows His rules, so far as
he is such, he can be judged by no one ; for one who should judge
him ought to be wiser or greater than the Spirit of God, so as to be
able to penetrate and measure that Spirit But who can do this?
So Chrysostom. Nevertheless, the spiritual man often can be and
ought to be judged, because he is not known to be spiritual in a
given matter. Hence, in cxiv. 29, he says, “Let the others speak
two or three, and let the others judge.” Moreover, many boast
themselves to be spiritual who are merely natural, as, e.g.> the
Anabaptists. But S. Paul was confessedly spiritual, hence he adds,
We have the mind of Christ — the wisdom of Christ which is spiritual
and Divine, not natural and human. Our wisdom is not that of Plato
or Pythagoras, but of Christ, who has infused His truths into our
minds. So Chrysostom.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER III

2 Milk is fit for children. 3 Strife and - division , arguments of a fleshly mind.
7 He that planteth , and he that watereth t is nothing. 9 The ministers are
Cod's fellowworkmen. II Christ the only foundation. 16 Men the temples
of God t which 17 must be kept holy . 19 The wisdom of this world is foolish*
ness with God.

AND I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto
/JL carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat : for hitherto ye were not able
to bear it , neither yet now are ye able.

3 For ye are yet carnal : for whereas there is among you envying, and strife,
and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men ?

4 For while one saith, I am of Paul ; and another, I am of Apollos ; are ye
not carnal ?

5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed,
even as the Lord gave to every man ?

6 I have planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave the increase.

7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth ; but
God that giveth the increase.

8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one : and every man shall
receive his own reward according to his own labour.

9 For we are labourers together with God : ye are God’s husbandry, ye are
God's building.

10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master-
builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every
man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus
Christ

12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones,
wood, hay, stubble ;

13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it,
because it shall be revealed by fire ; and the fire shall try every man’s work of
what sort it is.

14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive
a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself
shall be saved ; yet so as by fire.

16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God
dwelleth in you ?

17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy ; for the temple
of God is holy, which temple ye are.

Digitized by Google

48 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

1 8 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise
in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written.
He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.

21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours ;

22 Whether Paul, or Apollo6, or Cephas* or the world, or life, or death, or
things present, or things to come ; all are yours ;

23 And ye are Christ's ; and Christ is God's.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

lie endeavours to put an end to the divisions among the Corinthians, by reminding
them of their mutual subjection and union in Christ and God.

i He points out that Paul and ApoQos are but ministers of Christ
(vers. 1-9).

ii. He reminds them that Christ is the foundation of the Church : let each

one, therefore, take heed what he builds on that foundation ; for if
it is only hay and stubble he will be saved indeed, but as by fire
(vers. 10-15).

iii. He tells them that they are the temple of God, and bids them beware
how they break in pieces or violate that temple (vers. 16-20).

iv. He forbids party strife (vers. 21-23).

Vers. 1, 2 . — As babes in Christ I have fed you with milk and not
with meat In the preceding chapter the Apostle, to support his
own authority, and to remove from the minds of the Corinthians the
false opinion that they had about his ignorance and lack of speaking
powers, said that he spoke wisdom among them that were perfect :
hidden wisdom which the eye had not seen, nor the ear heard, but
which God had revealed. Now, anticipating an objection, he gives
the reason why he had not displayed this wisdom to the Corinthians,
and transfers the blame from himself to them. It was because they
were like children and carnal, not yet capable of receiving such
wisdom, and to be fed, therefore, not with meat but with milk.

Notice that the Apostle designates as miik that easier, pleasanter,
and more simple teaching about the Manhood of Christ, His grace
and redemption, which befits catechumens recently converted and
still carnaL He calls “meat,” or solid food, the more perfect and
robust teaching about the deeper mysteries, such as about God,
about the Spirit of God and spiritual things, about the wisdom,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MILK AND STRONG MEAT

power, and love of the Cross. So say Ambrose, Theophylact, S.
Thomas. S. Anselm moralises thus : “ The same Christ is milk to
man through the Incarnation ; solid food to an angel through His
Divinity . The same Christ crucified again , the same lection , the same
sermon is taken by carnal men as milk , by spiritual as solid food.”

S. Paul is here alluding, as his custom is, to Isa. xxviii. 9, and to
Isa. lv. 1. In this connection notice that what Isaiah calls “wine”
S. Paul calls “ meat,” which represents the full spiritual wisdom of
the perfect, as milk signifies the discipline of children and of the
imperfect. Hence, in former times wine and milk were given to the
newly baptized, when they had been clad with the white robes, and
this custom, as S. Jerome says in his commentary on Isaiah, is still
kept up in the churches of the West. In other places honey and
milk were given, as Tertullian testifies ( contra Marcion lib. i. c. 14),
to denote (1.) their infancy and innocence in Christ, milk being a
symbol of both. Hence Homer calls men that are innocent and just
“ feeders on milk,” as Clemens Alexandrinus says (Pcedag. lib. i. c. 6).
(2.) To denote their likeness to Christ, of whom Isaiah sang (vii.
1 5), “ Butter and honey shall He eat.” (3.) To symbolise the infantine
gentleness, humility, and meekness of the Christian life. Hence it
was that at the first sacrifice of the Mass, which the newly baptized
heard at Easter, viz., on Low Sunday, there was read as the Epistle
that portion of S. Peter’s Epistle in which occur the words, “ As new-
born babes desire the sincere milk of the word.” Hence S. Agnes,
on the authority of S. Ambrose {Serm. 90), used to say, “ Milk and
honey have I received from His mouth.” Clement ( Pcedag . lib. i. c. 6)
discourses at length about this milk.

Ver. 3. — Whereas there is among you envying and strife ... are
ye not carnal t (1.) The word carnal is here applied to one who
not only has his natural use of sense and reason, but also to one
who follows the motions and dictates of the flesh, that is, of his
animal nature. And, therefore, as S. Thomas rightly remarks, he
who follows the motions of lust, or of his fallen nature, is carnal,
natural, walking according to man, and destitute of the Spirit of

God. (2.) Both here and in Gal. v. 19., the works of the flesh,
VOL. 1. d

Digitized by v^,ooQle

50 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

i.e. % of our corrupt nature, include envying, jealousy, strife, which
are spiritual sins, as well as gluttony and lust, which are, strictly
speaking, fleshly. Cf. notes to Rom. vil 22, and Gal. v. 17.
The meaning is : You, O Corinthians, are carnal, /.<?., conten-
tious, because you fight like boys foolishly about the dignity of
your teachers, and extol and put up for sale, one Paul, another
Apollos.

Ver. 5. — Even as the Lord gave to every man. God gave to each
one of His ministers powers of such kind and such extent as befitted
his ministry. Therefore they should glory in God alone, not in Paul
or Apollos, His ministers. These latter were not the lords or the
authors of their faith, but merely the instruments used by God. So
Anselm, Ambrose, Theophylact.

Ver. 6 . — I have planted, \ Apollos watered ; but God gave the
increase. I was the first to sow the seeds of the faith at Corinth,
and then Apollos coming after me helped it forward (Acts xviii. 26).
But it was God who gave the inner life and strength of grace for
growth and maturity in Christian faith and virtue : this belongs to
God alone. Cf. Augustine (in Joan. Tr. 5).

God gives to plants their increase, not, as rustics suppose, by directly
adding some special daily power of growth, but by bestowing upon
and preserving to the nature itself of the seed or the root a vigorous
power of growth. In other words, He is continually bestowing it and
preserving it, and co-operating with it : for the Divine work of pre-
servation is nothing but a continuation of the primal creative power.
He does this by ordering and tempering according to His counsel
the rain, heat, and winds, and other things needed by the fruits of
the ground, so that, as these are tempered, the fruit is larger or
smaller. So it is in the sowing of the Word of God, and in its
growth, perfecting and harvest in the minds of men.

It appears from this (1.) that outward preaching, calling, examples,
and miracles are not alone sufficient for conversion and the begin-
ning of the spiritual life, or for its further growth. (2.) That, though
all alike hear the same word of preaching, yet some profit little, some
profit much by it, viz., those whom God works upon by a special

Digitized by v^,ooQle

LABOURERS WITH GOD

5 *

inward calling, and whose hearts He touches to change their lives,
or to continue to rise to higher things. Hence, both those who
preach and those who hear profit most who earnestly beseech God
for this inward influence.

Ver. 7. — So then neither is he that planteth any things neither he
that watereth, hut God that giveth the increase . The husbandman
who plants and waters does hardly anything when compared with
God; for he works from without only, and whatever he does he
receives it from God, and works as His instrument But God works
within directly as the chief agent, and supplies the power of vigorous
growth. For action is assigned to the chief agent, and especially to
the first cause. So S. Thomas and Theophylact ; S. Augustine (in
i. Ep. S. John. Tr. 7) says beautifully : “ Outward ministries are
helps and warnings , but He that teacheth the heart has His throne in
heaven. These words which we address to another from without are
to him as the husbandman to the tree . For the husbandman acts upon
the tree from without , by diligently watering and tending it, but He
does not fashion its fruits” It is God that co-operates with the
tree, and lends it the power of bringing forth fruit In the same
way the words of the preacher do but little, for they sound from
without only. But it is God who co-operates with them within, and
by His grace illuminates and converts the soul

Ver. 8 . — Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one. They
are one, say S. Thomas, Anselm, and others, in office and one in
their ministry, i.e., they are both alike ministers. Therefore one
is not to be despised or extolled in comparison of another, e.g.,
Paul in comparison of A polios. Moreover, all ought to be knit to-
gether as one by the same bond of charity, and ought not to cause
divisions on account of their ministers. For although they may
have different gifts, yet they all discharge the self-same duty, and
are one in Christ, who hates schisms, loves unity, and carefully
watches over His ministers, however feeble they be, and wishes
them to be esteemed and honoured by all, not as men but as His
representatives.

And every man shall receive his own reward according to his labour.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

52 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

This passage shows clearly the merits of good works ; for where there
is reward there is merit, the two terms being correlatives.

He does not say, it should be noticed, that “ each one shall receive
a reward according to the fruit that he has brought forth,” but
simply “ according to his labour,” for the fruit is not in our power,
but in the hand of God that giveth the increase. You will receive,
therefore, a full reward for all genuine labour, even though no fruit
follow — though no heretic or sinner be converted. Nay, the reward
will be the greater, because it is more difficult and more dishearten-
ing to preach when little or no fruit is seen than when many applaud
the sermon, or profit by it

Ver. 9. — For we are labourers together with God. S. Dionysius
( Calest. Hierarch, c. 3) says, “ A greats an angelic \ nay, a Divine
dignity is it to become a fellow-worker with God in the conversion of
souls , and to show openly to all the Divine power working in us .”

Ye are God's husbandry. Not Paul’s or Apollos’ : so you cannot
boast yourselves in them. S. Paul continues the illustration drawn
from agriculture. The chief tiller is God; Paul and Apollos are
his servants; the Corinthians are the field; the seed is grace, the
fruits good works. God by His Spirit cultivates within: Paul
assists Him by his preaching from without So Anselm.

Ye are God's building . He inculcates the same truth by another
illustration from building and architecture. The first architect is
God ; the secondary minister is Paul ; the building is the Church
and every Christian souL So Anselm.

We should observe that the Hebrews and Syrians rejoice in
metaphors and parables, and run them together, easily passing from
one to another.

Ver. 10. — According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as
a wise master-builder I have laid the foundation. Not mine is this
building, not mine the work ; for although I, as the first architect,
laid the foundations, by my preaching, of the Church at Corinth, yet
whatever I did, and brought to perfection there, was done, not by
my strength, but by the grace of God. Let, then, this building of
God's Church be attributed to His grace, not to my efforts.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE ONE FOUNDATION

Ver. ii. — For other foundation can no man lay . I have laid the
foundation of your Church : let Apollos and others see what super-
structure they raise upon, but not endeavour to lay a new foun-
dation. For no other foundation can be laid, for it is Jesus Christ
Himself The foundation, then, of the Church, and of each indi-
vidual soul in it, is Jesus Christ, /.<?., faith in Him as our Saviour,
and especially that faith which is quickened by charity, on which
I have built you. So Anselm, and S. Gregory {lib. vii. epist. 47).

In this sense Christ alone is the foundation of the Church, and
the foundation of the foundations, as S. Augustine says (Ps. lxxxvii.
1), because He rests on Himself alone, and bears up all others,
even Peter. In another sense Peter is the foundation of the
Church, viz., a secondary one, because from his firmness in the
faith he cannot publicly teach error, but always confirms others in it,
and gives them light This is laid down by S. Thomas and all
Catholic theologians. In a similar sense, not only Peter, but all the
Apostles, are called the foundations of the Church (Ps. lxxxvii. 1 ;
Rev. xxi. 19).

Vers. 12 and 13. — Now if any man build . . . the fire shall try
every man's work of what sort it is. This is a metaphor drawn from
a house on fire, which if constructed of gold or precious stones
receives no damage, but if of wood or stubble is consumed.

Notice in passing that by " precious stones * we must here
understand marble, porphyry, and the like, not diamonds or other
gems ; for the houses of wealthy men are built of the former, not of
the latter. Such was the boast of Augustus : 44 I received the city
built of brick, I leave it built of marble.” The Apostle’s meaning,
then, is that, if a fire occur, a house built of marble and gold is not
injured by it, but rather shines the more brightly. But the next
house, being built of wood and stubble, will burn, and its tenant will
escape indeed, but he will be scorched. So if any Christian, and
especially any teacher or preacher of the Gospel (for such are primarily
referred to here, as appears from vers. 4, 6, and 10), build upon the
faith of Christ gold and silver, that is, according to Theodore and
Theophylact, holy works, and especially sound, edifying, and holy

Digitized by v^,ooQle

54 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

doctrine, he shall receive his reward. So Ambrose and S. Anselm.
S. Thomas says : “ Gold is charity ; silver , contemplative wisdom ;
precious stones are the other virtues .” On the other hand, wood, hay,
stubble are sins, not deadly sins, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and
Gregory ( contra . Magd. lib. iv. c. 13) think (for these are lead and
brass, as is pointed out by Anselm and S. Thomas and S. Augustine
(Enchirid. c. 68), nor are they built upon, but they overturn and
destroy the building, viz., that living faith which alone wins a reward
from Christ) ; but they represent venial sins, which make the mind
cling to vanities, to worldly advantages, to vain-glory. But strictly
speaking the Apostle is referring, when he speaks of wood, hay,
stubble, to doctrine that is fluid, frivolous, showy, ornamental, wire-
drawn, and useless. So say Ambrose, S. Thomas, Theodoret, An-
selm. For he that builds these things on the foundation of faith
in Christ shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

The Apostle in these verses leaves the Corinthians to give a
warning to Apollos and their other teachers and preachers, especially
those gifted with eloquence, to beware of their great danger, vain-
glory, and to be teachers of the truth in its purity, lest if they do
otherwise they have to expiate their sin by fire. That there were
some such at Corinth who had been the cause or the occasion of
strife and division is pretty plainly hinted here and in the next
chapter in vers. 6, 10, 15, 18, and 19.

For the day shall declare it This day is the day of the Lord, to
be marked with a white or black stone, the day of judgment,
especially of the universal judgment, which shall be revealed in fire.
For that day of the Lord is now our day, as Anselm, Theodoret,
Ambrose, and S. Thomas say. Cf. also 2 Tim. iv. 8; i. 12 ; and v.
15. In these and other places we are evidently to understand “that
day” to be as it were a technical name for the famous day of
universal judgment

But notice that the day of particular judgment is also to be in-
cluded under this day of universal judgment For the judgment
of both is one and the same, as is also their sentence.

It shall be revealed by fire. What is this fire? To answer this we

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE DAY OF THE LORD

must notice that the Apostle speaks of three things: (i.) that the
day of the Lord shall be revealed in fire ; (2.) that it shall try each
man’s work ; (3.) that those who build wood, hay, stubble shall pass
through it, and shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

1. Many of the ancients, as Origen (in Lucam , hom. 14), Ambrose
(in Ps. xxxvii.), Lactantius (Jib. vii. c. 21), Basil (in Isa. iv.), Rupert
(in Gen. lib . ii. c. 32), take the fire to be literal fire, which they think
all souls, even those of Peter and Paul, must pass through on their
way to heaven, to have their impurities purged away, whether it be
the general conflagration at the end of the world, or the purgatorial
fire beneath the earth, or some other fire in the upper aether. For
Bede says (Hist. lib. iii. xix.) that S. Fursey saw huge fires on the
road which led to heaven, through which the traveller must pass.
But this opinion, though it has not been condemned, and though
Bellarmine (de Purg. lib. iL 1) has not ventured to condemn it, yet
lacks foundation. For this passage of the Apostle’s, on which alone
those who uphold this view rely, has a different meaning. That
vision of Fursey’s, too, was merely a representation, under the image
of literal fire, of God’s spiritual judgment and the punishments
awaiting carnal men, as I will show presently.

2. S. Chrysostom and Theophylact, who were followed by the
Greek Fathers at the Council of Florence, reply that it is hell-fire, in
which the sinner will remain safely, undestroyed and undying,
so as to undergo punishment everlastingly. But this is a perversion
of the meaning: for salvation everywhere stands in Scripture
for a state of freedom from pain and sorrow, never for an eternal
existence in torments. And so all other interpreters understand it,
as well as the Latin Fathers at that same Council.

But we should notice that though S. Chrysostom understands this
verse of hell, yet he does not deny that it may refer to purgatory, as
was falsely asserted by Mark, Archbishop of Ephesus, at the Council.
He even expressly admits it (in Matt. Horn . 32, in Philipp. Horn. 3,
Heb. Hom. 4, and elsewhere). In these places he exhorts the faith-
ful to pray for the faithful departed in purgatory ; for we may not
pray for those in hell, since there there is no redemption.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

56 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

3. Heretics reply that this fire is the fire of the tribulation of
this life ; and this is even implied by Anselm and Gregory (Dial. iv.
39) and Augustine (in Ps. xxxviii), all of whom, however, understand
it of purgatory, or that it is the fire of confusion, which they feign
that the Holy Spirit sends upon the Saints in life, or else at their
death, as, e.g ., they say He did in the case of SS. Bernard, Francis, and
Dominic, to show them their errors about the monastic life, the Mass,
and Confession, that so they might have their eyes opened and be
led to retract ‘ But all this is a gratuitous invention, nor does there
exist any such retractation made by these Saints or by others on their
death-beds : they rather gave with constancy an exhortation to their
followers to persist and go forward in the monastic life.

Add to this that many have died suddenly, and still die suddenly,
or die in their sleep, and that they depart with the stain of venial
sins. Where are they purged? Not in heaven, for there nothing
that defiles shall enter (Rev. xxi. 27); not in hell, for that is the
place of the lost ; therefore, it must be in purgatory. For after this
life there is no place for the wonted mercy and pardon of God, but
only for justice and for just making amends, or rather suffering
amends, so that no one may say that God freely forgives all sin to
the dead, /.<?., all pain and guilt Lastly, the day of death is not
called the day of the Lord, but the day of judgment; nor does fire
denote the confusion that happens then, but literal fire.

Calvin objects that wood, hay, stubble are used figuratively, so
therefore is fire. I reply by denying that it follows ; for it appears
that the day of the Lord is to be revealed by fire properly so called,
and I shall show this directly.

4. Sedulius, Cajetan, Theodoret, Ambrose understand this
fire of the strict and severe examination of the judgment of God,
punishing sin after death by fire ; or, as Bellarmine suggests, it is the
fire partly of judgment, partly of purgatory. In other words, as the
works of sinners shall have their fiery examination, so too shall they
that work them have their fire, the fire of vengeance, in purgatory.
By way of analogy that judgment is called by the name of fire, because,
like fire, it will be most purifying, most searching, most rapid, and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

PURGATORY

most efficacious (Mai. iii. 2 ; Heb. xii. 29). But since the words of
the Apostle speak of nothing but fire, and repeat it twice and three
times, they seem plainly and properly to mean what they say, and
to denote literal fire throughout, with no figure, double meaning, or
variation.

I say, then, 1. that it is certain that this place is understood of
the fire of purgatory. So it is taken by the Council of Florence, by
Ambrose, Theodoret, S. Thomas, Anselm, here, and in innumerable
places by the Greek and Latin Fathers, cited at length by Bellarmine
and Salmeron. This is the tradition and common opinion of the
Church and of doctors, although they may sometimes explain the
details differently, or apply them to purgatory in a different way.

It may be objected : If the Council of Florence understands this
passage of purgatorial fire, it is therefore a matter de fide , and must
be understood of it by all, and therefore also it is de fide , not only
that there is a purgatory, but that souls are purged in it by fire.

I answer by denying that it follows. For although the Latin
Fathers in the Council of Trent so understand it, and though con-
sequently it is certain that there is a purgatorial fire, yet they were
unwilling to define it to be a matter of faith that it is fire, but only
that it is purgatorial. They did this, too, so as not to offend the
Greeks, who admitted indeed a purgatory, but denied the existence
of fire in it, saying merely that it was a dark place and full of
suffering.

2. The fire spoken of here by the Apostle is, properly speaking,
the fire of the conflagration of the world. This appears from the
fact that it will be in the day of the Lord, that is, at the last judgment,
which is everywhere described in Scripture u by fire which is to burn
up the world.” C f. Ps. xcvil 3 ; 2 Thess. i. 8 ; Joel ii. 3 ; 2 S. Peter
iii. 12. For this fire will at the same time consume the world, and
prove and purge those who shall then be living, as theologians
everywhere lay down ; it will also be the precursor, or rather the
companion and lictor, of Christ, the Judge. It will, too, bring death
and punishment, if not to the pure, at any rate to the impure, pro-

58 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

carry off the condemned with it into hell, and so it is said that “ the
day of the Lord shall be revealed by fire;” which means that that
day shall be revealed by fire as the day of the vengeance and judg-
ment of the Lord.

You will ask, How does this fire purge works which have long
passed away and are not? I reply that Scripture says that men’s
good and evil deeds follow them ; they are with them after death,
inasmuch as responsibility for them still remains with men, binding
them either to reward or punishment

You may ask again, How can works be said to be burnt? I
answer, in two ways: (i.) Figuratively, for they are compared to
stubble, which literally burns. Works, too, bum in a figurative sense,
i.e. y they are punished and destroyed like wood which is consumed
by fire. (2.) By metonymy the works are put for the worker, and
are thus said to burn.

Notice here that the Apostle uses this figure and metonymy so as
to carry on the illustration of a building which he introduced in ver.
9, and also because he is referring to the conflagration which is to
bum all the buildings in the world For men’s works build for
them as it were houses, just as silkworms spin little balls of silk, and
enwrap themselves in them, as if they were their houses ; so that if
you burn these little balls you burn the silkworm, and vice versa . So
here work is figuratively burnt like a house, because the worker and
builder to whom the works adhere, and in whom they may be said
to adhere, is burnt Moreover, the works rather than the workman
are said to be burnt, because the workman is not utterly consumed,
but is saved, yet so as by fire. But the guilt of his works is by this
fire consumed and done away.

It may be asked in the third place, How is it that this fire is said
to try gold and silver, *.*., good works ? I answer, By the very fact
that it does not touch them, but leaves them wholly unharmed,
because they are wholly without alloy; the fire declares the per-
fection of the workmen and their works. But it will manifest by
burning, by punishing wood, hay, stubble, when it shall attack
and burn those that committed venial sin, and shall purge them

Digitized by v^,ooQle

TRIAL BY FIRE

from them, so as to save them, yet so as by fire. Similaily, in
olden times, until it was forbidden by the Canons as tempting God,
trial by ordeal was resorted to for the purpose of deciding guilt : an
accused person had to handle a red-hot iron, or walk upon it bare-
foot. If he was really guilty he was burnt ; if innocent, uninjured.
This happened to S. Cunegund, wife of the Emperor Henry, and
to the three children in the Babylonian furnace. The one proved
her chastity by walking barefoot over the hot iron, the others their
innocence by passing uninjured through the fiery furnace.

It may be asked again, How does fire try the work of every man ?
For Paul, and all who are already dead, do not pass through the
fire that consumes the world. I reply (i.) that S. Paul is in the
habit of speaking as if the last day were close at hand, that so he
may stir up every one to prepare himself for a day that is uncertain,
and perhaps soon to come. (2.) Moreover, this fire will purge the
whole world, and therefore if there is any stain in any of the dead
that has not yet been purged away, it will be attacked and punished
by that fire ; and so each one’s work, whether he be living or dead,
will be manifested. (3.) As the Apostle includes the day of death
under the day of the Lord, and particular judgment under the
general, and regards them under one aspect, so in like manner,
under the fire that will accompany Christ when He comes in
judgment, and that will purge whatever then remains that needs
purging, he wishes us to understand that fire by which souls begin ,
to be purged directly after death. By this fire, therefore, he means
the fire of purgatory.

It is no objection to this that the fire which shall destroy the
world will be before death, when it should be after death. For (1.)
it will do away with the sins of the whole life and of death also.
But it cannot be after death so as to purge the dead, for they that
are dead then will immediately rise and be carried to judgment
(2.) If any one before death shall chance not to have been suffice
ently purged, he will after death be fully dealt with by the same
purgatorial fire. This is proved by this verse ; for the Apostle writes
it to the living, who were not to see the general conflagration, but

Digitized by v^,ooQle

60 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

were to have their own purgatory after death, as the others were to
have theirs at death. For why should one escape this fire more
than the other, if their merits were the same ? (3.) The Greek word
is in the present tense, “is being revealed in other words, the “day
of the Lord” is revealed at death. (4.) The work of every one
will be tried by this purgatorial fire, and yet the work of those alive
at the general conflagration will alone be tried by it. (5.) Ail the
Catholic Fathers, the Latin doctors, and the Council of Florence,
at its beginning, understand this passage of the fire of purgatory, and
it has the unanimous tradition of the Church. (6.) To try by purg-
ing is in the strictest sense the work of purgatory, and of it We
can most truly say that it shall save, yet so as by fire. For from the
moment of death a man will be saved, and when he has been
thoroughly purged he will fly from purgatory to heaven, before the
great day of the Lord.

As, then, the saying of the Apostle’s, that the day of the Lord shall
be revealed by fire, exactly suits the fire at the end of the world, so
also it strictly falls in with the fire of purgatory, because it shall try
each man’s work*, and because the righteous man who has sinned
shall be saved yet so as by fire.

I must add to this that theologians of repute, as Francis Suarez
(pt iii. vol. 2, disp. 57. sec. 1), hold that this general conflagration
will not slay and purge men, but that after the resurrection, at the
^ general judgment, this fire will only be for the terror and punish-
ment of the lost, and to burn up and renew the world after judg-
ment. Still, they say, that we can infer that it will try and purge
the good, inasmuch as it will be a witness to the acknowledgment
by Christ of their innocence resulting from the purgation they have
undergone in purgatory. It is therefore much more certain that the
trial spoken of here will be by the fire of purgatory rather than by
the conflagration at the end of the world. In short, the whole of
this passage of the Apostle’s must be understood as well of the day
of judgment, both particular and universal, as of purgatory and the
fire that is to consume the world. It may be asked, Why does the
Apostle blend these and speak indifferently of both judgments and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE FIRE OF JUDGMENT

both fires? The reason is (i.) that as the particular and general
judgment will be one and the same, so will the fire of purgatory and
at the end of the world be one and the same. One purges men,
the other the world. The fire of purgatory is related as a part to
the whole to the general fire which will be the world’s purgatory ;
it will give place to it, and perhaps be changed into it, and perhaps
become numerically one with it. (2.) The Apostle frequently speaks
of the day of judgment being close at hand, and consequently as if
the passage from purgatory to the general conflagration were soon
to be made ; and, as was said, he does this that men may prepare
themselves for it by holy and pious lives. Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 15 ; Heb.
xL 40 > 2 Cor. v. 1, 3, 4. Similarly, the Prophets and Christ Himself
often mingle type and antitype, as in S. Matt. xxiv. Christ speaks
of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the world as one destruction,
and as if one were to follow closely upon the other. This is why
the Apostles, when Christ said this, thought that the two would be
nearly contemporaneous, though afterwards when better taught they
perceived and corrected their mistake.

You may ask secondly, How can the words, " it shall be revealed
by fire,” be applied to the particular judgment? What fire will be
Christ’s assessor at the particular judgment when each man’s works
are tried and declared? I answer that the fire of purgatory is
Christ’s assistant in the particular judgment of any man, ready to
His hand to try, punish, and purge each man’s work. We ought to
remark that S. Paul personifies this purgatorial fire, and makes it a
kind of assessor to Christ, so that, like soldiers before their captain,
all the dead must pass before it, to be inspected, and, if they need it,
to be corrected. The Apostle does this (1.) to carry on his figure
of gold and the refiner ; (2.) to keep the fitting proportion between this
fire and the general conflagration, to which his reference is primarily
when he says, “ the day of the Lord shall be revealed by fire.” Notice
also that, as when the Prophets and Christ blend confusedly type
and antitype, as, e.g., when they speak of Solomon and Christ, of the
destruction of the city and the world, and appear to apply to both
things, which have more reference to the one than to the other, so

Digitized by v^,ooQle

62 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

also S. Paul does here : for the words, “ the day of the Lord shall be
revealed by fire,” refer rather to the conflagration at the end of the
world ; but the words that follow, “ the fire shall try every man’s
work,” have to do rather with the fire of purgatory.

The fire of purgatory, then, is Christ’s assistant at the day of par-
ticular judgment, His precursor, lictor, jailer, and scourge ; it examines
each man’s work, leaves the gold of good works unharmed, but burns
up as if they were its proper fuel all works of wood, hay, stubble ; and
so each one shall suffer loss, or punishment — in such a way, how-
ever, that the worker is saved, yet so as by fire. And so at the day
of death and particular judgment this fire is revealed to each one.
And this was the meaning of Fursey’s vision. For when he saw
himself dead and the fire approaching him, he said to the angel,
“Lord, lo! the fire is coming near me.” The angel answered,
“ What thou didst not kindle shall not burn thee. For though the
pyre seem great and terrible, yet it tries every man according to
he merit of his works, for each man’s lust shall be burnt in this fire.
For just as each one bums in his body with unlawful lust, so when
freed from the body shall he be burnt by just punishment.”

Ver. 1 5 . — But he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire . Isidorius
Clarius wrongly applies this to the “ foundation.” Grammatically it is
possible, but logically not, for it does not agree with the context
For the Apostle is showing that those teachers who erect an empty
and showy structure on the faith of Christ shall be punished with
fire. Moreover, the preceding words, “he shall receive a reward,”
evidently refer to the builder, not to the foundation. So, too, the
opposite clause here must be referred to him who builds and not to
the foundation laid.

Notice (1.) that as is a mark of truth, not of comparison. So in
S. John i. 14: “We have seen His glory, the glory as of the Only-
begotten of the Father,” that glory which befitted the Only-
begottea (2.) That it is possible for or to be the introduction of a
comparison here. The meaning then would be, He shall be saved
like as one who escapes from a burning house, and passes scorched
through the flames, as I said at ver. 12. Hence it appears both

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SUPERSTRUCTURE

<53

that there is a purgatory and that there is fire. Hence Chrysostom
( Horn . ad pcp. 6 g) says that “the Apostles ordered that at the sacrifice
of the Mass prayer be offered for the departed.” Dionysius ( Eccles .
Hierarch . evil pt. 3) records these prayers, and says that he received
them from the Apostles. For, as S. Augustine says (Ps. xxxviii),
“Because it is said ‘shall be saved/ this fire is thought little of,
but it will be more than anything that man can endure in this life.”
S. Bernard too says {de Obit. Humb.), “What we have neglected
here shall there be paid a hundredfold.”

Many think that the fire of purgatory is the same as the fire of
hell, which borders on purgatory, but only differs from it in duration.
From this Anselm gives the wise advice: “If to escape tortures

we obey a king here, let us obey the will of God so as to escape
that fire which is more terrible than all tortures here.” And S.
Chrysostom {de Penit. hom. 5) says: “Now there is space for

repentance; let then penitence forestall punishment; let us come
before His face with confession ; let us extinguish the fire prepared
for our sins, not with many waters, but with a few tears.” At all
events, it is better and easier to be purged with water than with fire :
it is better to spend the whole life in the purgatory of penitence
than to dwell for a year in the purgatory of fire.

S. Bernard, in his sermon on “the wood, hay, stubble,” gives a
tropological discourse that is much to the point He says : “ The
foundation is Christy the wood is perishable , the hay yielding, the
stubble light. They who began stoutly enough, but when broken are
not renewed, are the wood. They are the hay who , being lukewarm by
reason of the sloth that they should have fled from, are unwilling to
touch arduous * labours with the tip of their fingers. They are the
stubble who, being tossed about by every light breeze, never remain
in the same state. For such must we fear, though not despair: for if
they have heed to Christ as the foundation, and have finished their
life in Him as the Way, they shall be saved, yet so as by fire. . . .
Fire has three things — smoke, light, heat. Smoke calls forth tears,
light illuminates what is near, heat burns. So he who is of this
sort ought to have smoke, that is, a smarting as it were in his mind.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

64 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

because of his lukewarmness , his remissness , his fickleness; for as far
as in him lies he disturbs and overthrows natural order . So, too,
should he have light in his fnouth, that he may by confession say and
bewail that he is what he knows himself to be ; so that his tongue may
sharpen his conscience, and his conscience shame his tongue . It is
necessary , too, that he feel in his body the heat of the suffering exacted
by penitence — in some degree at all events, if not very acutely . Thinkest
thou that He who wishes all men to be saved will cast away those
who in this way are of contrite heart, who humbly confess, and try
to bring under their bodies f . . . There are, too, others who build on
this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, who begin ardently, more
ardently go forward, and most ardently seek perfection , not paying any
heed to what the flesh can do, but what the Spirit wills."

Ver. 1 6. — Know ye not that ye are the temple of God l This
is a return to the image of ver. 9 : “Ye are God’s building,” and
therefore not a heathen temple, but the temple of God, in which by
faith, grace, charity, and His gifts He dwells. So Anselm and others.
For a fuller exposition of this, see the notes to 2 Cor. vl 16.

How the soul may be dedicated as a temple to God is declared at
length by S. Bernard (Serm. 1 de Dedic. EccL). He says that there
are five things observed in a dedication : the sprinkling, the marking
with the cross, the anointing, the illumination, and the benediction ;
and all these take place also in the dedication of the soul

Observe that up to the present S. Paul has been dealing with
those teachers and those of the faithful who build up the holy
edifice of the Church. He now turns to those who undermine it.

Ver. 17. — If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God
destroy . If any one, through the fatal pride that is born of human
wisdom, through novel, erroneous, and pestilential teaching, or
through schisms such as are found among you, O Corinthians,
says Anselm; or. if any one in any other way corrupt the Church,
or any individual soul in it — him shall God destroy. The Apostle
is speaking mainly of the corruption that comes through the teaching
of false doctrine, through pride, through envy, or the fomenting
of schism. For as he began, so does he finish this chapter with

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE TEMPLE OF GOD

warnings to false teachers. It appears, too, from the next words
where he says that any such defiler shall not be saved, so as by
fire, but shall be consumed in everlasting fire.

Ver, 18 . — If any man among you seemeih to be wise. If any man
is proud of his worldly wisdom and eloquence, his earthly knowledge
and so come to look down on others, let him become filled with
humility and faith, and with the folly of the Cross, so as to be a
fool in the eyes of the world. Cf. notes on L 26. This with God
is the only true wisdom. Since the world's wisdom is folly with
God, and God’s wisdom foolishness to the world, it follows that we
cannot be truly wise unless according to the world we are fools —
unless, in spite of our greatness and wisdom before the world, we
submit ourselves like children, nay, like fools, to the faith, doctrine,
cross, and obedience of Christ. “ So? says S. Bernard (Serm. 1 de
Epiph.), “ did the three Magi worship the Child in the manger and
become fools, so as to learn wisdom ; and so the Spirit taught them
what was afterwards preached by apostles : 1 He who wishes to be wise
let him become a fool ', that he may be wise ? They enter the stable,
they find a child wrapped in swaddling clothes : they think no scorn
of the stable, stumble not at the swaddling clothes, nor find offence
in the Infant at the breast : they fall down, they worship Him as
King, they adore Him as God, Surely, He who led thither their
steps also opened the eyes of their mind. He who guided them from
without by a star, also taught them in the deepest recesses of the
heart.” S. Basil asks {Reg, brevior, 274) : " How is any one made
a fool in this world?” And he replies, “ If he fears the judgment
of God, who says, * Woe to them that are wise in their own eyes , and
prudent in their own sight / 9 and if he imitates Him who said, l I
became even as a beast before Thee ; 9 if he throw away all empty belief
in his own wisdom, reverse all his former judgments, and confess that
not even from the beginning had he ever thought aright till he was
taught by the command of God what was pleasing to Him in thought,
word, and deed?

Ver. 19 . — For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.

God has rejected the wisdom of the world as worthless, (1.) because

vol. 1. s

Digitized by v^,ooQle

66 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

it has nothing in it that is wholesome and Divine, and does nothing
towards salvation ; (2.) He would not use it in the preaching of the
Apostles, but employed instead unlettered Apostles; (3.) It is often
contrary to the faith, not only in speculative matters (as, e.g., all who
are merely worldly-wise reject the mystery of the Holy Trinity, of the
Incarnation and death of the Son of God as being impossible and
incredible), but also in matters of practice and morals. For Christ
bids us love our enemies ; the wisdom of the world bids us hate
them : Christ bids us overcome evil with good, the world says, “ Re-
turn evil for evil;” Christ calls blessed the poor, the meek, them
that mourn, that hunger, that suffer persecution, but the world says
that it is the rich, those that are in high station, that laugh, feast,
and rule, that are happy.

For it is written , , He taketh the wise in their own craftiness . This
is from Job v. 13. They are the words, not of Job, but of Eliphaz,
who wished to show that Job had deserved his calamities through his
sins. He was reproved by God (Job xlii. 7), and therefore these
words of Eliphaz have not the authority of Holy Scripture, but only
that of a wise man. For S. Paul approves of this saying of Eliphaz
as being true, and wisely said by a wise man.

God takes the wise in their craftiness when He fulfils His will by
the very means by which they thought to reverse it. When the
brothers of Joseph, wishing to stultify his dreams about his future
leadership, threw him into a pit and sold him into Egypt, God,
through their action, exalted him, and made him ruler over Egypt,
and forced his brothers to do him reverence. In like manner God
overruled the wisdom of Pharaoh at the Red Sea, of Saul and
Achithophel in their attempts to destroy David, of Haman at the
gallows, where he thought to slay Mordecai. So S. Thomas.

Ver. 20. — And again, the Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise,
that they are but vain. Ps. xciv. n. By all these quotations and
reasons S. Paul impresses on the Corinthians that the worldly
wisdom and eloquence of which they boasted themselves, and
through which they put Apollos before himself, were but vain. He
declares that the true wisdom is the faith and teaching of Christ,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

VANITY OF VANITIES 67

which he had preached them — in simple words, indeed, but yet with
burning and efficacious zeal.

S. Jerome, moralising on Ps. xciv., says: “ Do you wish to know
how it is that the thoughts of men are vain ? A father and mother
bring up a child , they promise themselves happiness in him, they send
him to be educated; he comes to manhood, they enter him as a soldier,
and when through thirty years they have thought of everything for him,
a slight attack of fever comes and carries away the fruit of all their
thought O anxiety of man / ho 7 u vain is it in human affairs / One
thought alone brings happiness — the thought of God”

Vers. 21,22. — Therefore, let no man glory in men . . . all are yours.
Glory not in Paul or in Apollos, for they and all others, nay, all
creatures are common to each one of you ; they all alike concur in
procuring your salvation.

It should be remarked that S. Paul, when he says that all are
yours, does not teach a community of goods such as there was in
paradise, and as Huss, Wyclif, and others fondly dream of. He
means that by way of final cause and use, not by way of possession,
all things have been intended to help forward their salvation. So
say Anselm, Ambrose, Theodoret, S. Thomas, Chrysostom. They
have been given to be used either objectively or subjectively, which
latter consists in acknowledging and praising the Creator in all
His creatures ; and this is what is meant by the common saying,
“The whole world swells the wealth of the faithful.” Cf. Theodoret
(Serm, 10 de. Provide), Hence S. Chrysostom says: “ We are
Christs in one way ; Christ is Gods in another ; the world is ours in
another. For we are Christs as His work ; Christ is Gods as His
most dearly-beloved Son ; the world is ours, not as being our work,
but because it was made on our account The world then is ours,
because all creatures in the world serve our body and soul ; life is
ours, that we may lay up a store of merits ; death is ours, because it
is the gate through which we pass to everlasting life ; or the death
of martyrdom is ours ; things present, whether adverse or prosperous,
are ours that we may extract good from them ; things to come are
ours, that we may enjoy them : they are now ours in hope, they will

Digitized by v^,ooQle

68 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. III.

be ours in fact in heaven. So S. Thomas and Anselm. Ours, too,
are evil things, such as hell and the lost, that we may rule over
them.

Ver. 23. — Ye are Christs . You are the mystical members of
Christ, your Head and Lord, and therefore you are His possession,
having been bought by His Blood. Therefore you should glory in
Christ, not in Paul or Apollos. So S. Thomas and Anselm.

And Christ is God's. (1.) Because, as God, He is the Son of God.
Ambrose says, “ Christ is the Son of God, and does His will, that
we too may do it” So, too, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Anselm. (2.)
Christ as man is God's, as His Lord and Head, being His creature
and His possession. So S. Thomas and Cajetan.

From what has been said it appears that all the faithful, and
especially the elect, are the end for which God created all things.
The end of all things is Christ as man. For this glory was the due
of such a man, viz., that all things should serve Him, be ordained
for Him, and look to Him as their end. But Christ is for God and
His glory, and therefore all glory is to be given, not to Paul or
Apollos, but to God alone.

S. Chrysostom (Horn. 10 Moral ) says beautifully: u All that we
are and all that we have comes from Christ: life and light \ and spirit
and air and earth. If any of these be taken from us we perish , for
we are but strangers and pilgrims . 1 Mine and thine 9 are , when
carefully considered , but empty words . Though you may speak of your
house as being your own , you speak foolishly ; for indeed the air , the
earthy the material of which it is made, yourself who build it \ and all
other things are the property of the Creator . Even if the use of it is
yours it is of uncertain duration , not only because of death, but also
because of the uncertainty of all things before death. For we are
Gods in two ways — by creation and re-creation ; and if your soul is
not your own , how can you say that your money is ? Since , therefore, it
is not your own, you should expend it upon your fellow-servants. Do
not say, then, * I spend my own l It is not your own, it is another* s.
nay , it is common to thee and thy fellow-servant, like as the sun and
air and all things are.”'

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER IV

I In what account the ministers ought to be had. 7 We have nothing which we
have not received. 9 The apostles spectacles to the world , angels, and men,
13 the filth and offscouring of the world: 15 yet our fathers in Christ, 16
whom we ought to follow .

1 ET a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the
-/ mysteries of God.

2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.

3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of
man’s judgment : yea, I judge not mine own self.

4 For I know nothing by myself ; yet am I not hereby justified : but he that
judgeth me is the Lord.

5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both
will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the
counsels of the hearts : and then shall every man have praise of God.

6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to
Apollos for your sakes ; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that
which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

7 For who maketh thee to differ from another t and what hast thou that thou
didst not receive ? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou
hadst not received it f

8 Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us : and
I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.

9 For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed
to death : for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.

10 We are fools for Christ’s sake, but ye are wise in Christ ; we are weak,
but ye are strong ; ye are honourable, but we are despised.

1 1 Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and
are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling place ;

12 And labour, working with our own hands : being reviled, we bless ; being
persecuted, we suffer it :

13 Being defamed, we intreat : we are made as the filth of the world, and
are the offscouring of all things unto this day.

14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.

15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not
many fathers : for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

1 7 For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which
be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.

18 Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you.

19 But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the
speech of them which are pufTed up, but the power.

20 For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.

21 What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the
spirit of meekness ?

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

S. Paul proceeds in his task of uprooting the divisions, the pride, and the boasting
of the Corinthians, and especially of some of their teachers who held him in
contempt. And —

i. He shows that he cares nothing for their judgment, or for that of

other men, but for God’s only.

ii. He reproves their elation at their gifts (vers. 7. 8).

iii. And chiefly he urges upon them the example of himself and of the

other Apostles, who, as the offscouring of the world, preached the

Gospel with all humility, despised and persecuted by all (vers. 9-14).

iv. He exhprts them as his children, as having begotten them in Christ,

and threatens to come soon to Corinth to rebuke and punish these

Arise, boastful, and puffed-up teachers (vers. 15-21).

Ver. 1 . — Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ.
I have forbidden you to boast yourselves in Paul or Apollos ; but
lest any man should therefore despise us, I say that every one
should regard us as ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries
of God. >

Kemnitius raises a railing objection based on these last words,
that the Council of Trent was wrong in relying on this passage to
prove that the Pope can give dispensation in the matter of vows
and laws ; for he says that a steward’s duty is not to relax laws but
to distribute goods. I answer that the Council knew this very well ;
but that its argument was simply this: If the stewardship of the
affairs of the Church has been intrusted to the Pope, therefore he
can in certain cases, when there is need, dispense, that is, dissolve
vows and oaths, and remit penances and the debt of temporal
punishment, just as the steward of a household can, when the
honour or profit of his lord demands it, make dispensations, grants,
or remissions — for this belongs to the office intrusted to him ; only
he is bound to dispense rightly, not to squander thoughtlessly, as

Digitized by v^,ooQle

OFFICE OF A STEWARD

S. Bernard says (de Precep. et Disp ., and de Consid. lib. iii.) : “It is
required in stewards that a man be found faithful ’ Where necessity

urges it, a dispensation is excusable ; where expedience calls for it, it is
laudable, I mean, of course, expedience which makes for the common
good, not that of the individual ; for where neither of these exists,
not only is a dispensation a breach of faith, it is a heartless act of
squandering.”

The word used here, “steward,” denotes one who has charge of
a house, and rules, divides, and arranges everything in it; one,
too, who gives gifts and remits debts, when he believes sincerely
that to do so would be pleasing to his lord, or make for his honour
and advantage. His chief virtues are prudence and faithfulness. So
does the Pope, as steward of the Church and vicegerent of Christ,
ordain everything, grant indulgences, and dispense with vows.

The mysteries of God mentioned here are the mystic secrets of
Divine doctrine and of the Sacraments of Christ For both these
are mysteries of Christ, intrusted by him to Paul and the other
Apostles as His stewards. Hence it was that the strife and divi-
sions of the Corinthians arose from a dispute about the Sacrament
of baptism, inasmuch as one would boast that he had received
baptism from Paul, another from Apollos. Cf. ch. i. 13.

Ver. 2. — Moreover, it is required in stewards that a man be found
faithful. You have been called from the study of wisdom and
human eloquence to the simple and lowly teaching of Christ, so as
not to dispute whether Paul or Apollos is the wiser or the more
eloquent; and I have said that both of us are stewards of this
teaching. Perchance, as you are always ready to draw comparisons
between us, you will now begin to dispute about our stewardship,
and ask, as men will, which of us is the more faithful in his office of
preacher. Many of you say that Paul is the more faithful and more
powerful, but Apollos more eloquent Each will boast of his own
teacher, and say that he is better and more faithful than we. There-
fore to cut away all occasion for comparison let me tell you that
I care nothing for the judgment of you or of any other man, but
for God’s alone. So says Theophylact, following Chrysostom.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

The chief quality required in a steward is faithfulness. S. Paul
alludes to the words of Christ: “Who then is a faithful and wise
steward?” (S. Luke xii. 42). Theophylact says : "He is faithful if
he does not regard Jus master’s goods as his own , if he does not treat
them as if he were owner of them } but distribute them as another’s
and his master’s: if he does not speak of them as his own , but on the
contrary say that what is his own belongs to his master So, too, is
a teacher or preacher faithful who does not seek his own glory, but
the glory of God and the conversion of souls, and do all he can to
forward those two objects, not only by his preaching, but also by a
perfect example of a holy life.

Ver. 3. — But with me it is a very small , thing . . . or of man's
judgment The Latin version gives “of man’s day.” The mean-
ing is the same ; for the “ day of the Lord ” is frequently put for the
“judgment of the Lord,” and a day is commonly named for de-
fendants to appear for judgment Cf. S. Jerome (ad Algas . qu.
x.). He adds that Paul, as a native of the Cilician Tarsus, used
the Greek idiom common there, and called “ human judgment ”
“man’s day.”

It would, however, be better to say that Paul, being a Hebrew,
borrowed this from the idiom of the Hebrews. For he is allud-
ing to Jer. xvii. 16, where Jeremiah, being mocked and persecuted
because of his prophecies, says: “Neither have I desired man’s
day; Thou knowest” The day of roan is that wherein man
prospers, and is honoured and praised by all as powerful, happy,
and enviable. Jeremiah’s meaning, then, is : “I have not desired
longer life, prosperity, riches, honours, pleasures, or the applauses
of men; for if I had looked for such things I should not have
prophesied to them of sadness and disaster, but I should have
praised their glory and their lusts; but this I did not do, nor
desired man’s day or his applause. For I know that man is but
frail and miserable, and quickly to vanish away in death with all
his goods and glory. Knowing this and recollecting it, I have not
desired to please man in my prophecies and teachings, but to
please and obey Thee, alone, O God, and to win commendation

Digitized by v^,ooQle

WORTHLESSNESS OF MEN'S JUDGMENT

from none but Thee, and I call upon Thee to be my witness to
this by saying, ‘Thou knowest,' just as Job did when he said (xvL
19), ‘Behold, my witness is in heaven, and my record is on high.'*

So, too, say S. Jerome, Rabanus, Hugo, S> Thomas, and others.
In imitation of Jeremiah, therefore, the Apostle says: “With me
it is a very small thing to be judged of you or of man's day.” In
other words, he cared little for the power and wisdom of this
•world, for man's favour and applause. Happy he who could say,
“ I have not desired man's day,'' and call God for a witness to his
truth. This is the height of perfection which enables a man to
count all things as dross if only be can gain Christ This noble
portion was that of Moses, who abjured his position as son of
Pharaoh’s daughter, choosing rather to suffer affliction with the
people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.

S. Chrysostom well moralises here : “ Let us not, therefore, seek
the praises of men. For to do so is to offer an insult to God, as though
we counted His praise insufficient, and so passed Him by, and strove
for that of our fellow-servants. For as those who contend for the
mastery in a small arena seek for themselves a larger, because they
think that the other is not large enough to display their prowess, so
do they who contend in the sight of God pass by the larger arena,
when they seek for the applause of men, and heap up for themselves
punishment through their lust for the lesser good. Everything has
been perverted, the whole world overturned, by this desire of ours to
do everything for the sake of men, by our want of diligence in good
works , by our disdaining the praise of God, and seeking only that of
our fellow-servants. In our crimes, again, we despise God, and fear
man; for if man were present we should abstain from fornication,
and even though our lust burnt more fiercely its violence would be held
in check by very shame lest we be seen by man. But when none but
God sees us, we not only are guilty of adultery and fornication, but
we have dared and still dare to commit far more heinous wickedness .
Would not this alone be enough to bring down upon us Gods avenging
thunders ? Hence it is that all our woes have sprung, because in our
disgraceful actions we fear not God but man.”

Digitized by v^,ooQle

74 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

S. Chrysostom again ( Horn . 17 in Ep. ad Rom.) says : “Just as
boys in play put on each other’s heads crowns of hay , and often laugh
behind his back at the boy they have crowned, \ so too do those who speak
you fair to your face jeer at you quietly among themselves. What
else is this but placing crowns of hay on each other’s heads ? Would
it were nothing else but hay / But as it is, this crown of ours is
full of warning to us, for it destroys all that we have rightly done.
Consider , then , its value ; flee from the loss it entails. For if there are
a hundred, or a thousand, or a host without number to applaud you,
yet all of them are nothing more than chattering jackdaws. Nay, if
you but think of the cloud of angel-witnesses they will seem viler than
worms, and their words more flimsy than cobwebs, more fleeting than
smoke, or than a dream of the night. Say to thy soul what Paul said,

4 Knowest thou not that we shaH judge angels ? * Then call it away
from such a feast, and chide it, and say, 4 Dost thou that art to sit in
judgment on angels wish to be judged by such unclean spirits V ”

S. Jerome too (ad Pammach.) wisely says : 44 The first monastic
virtue is to despise the judgment of men, and always to bear in mind
the words of the Apostle, 4 Jf yet I pleased mm I should not be the
servant of Christ Some such saying, too, did God address to the
Prophets when He told them that He would make their face as a city
of brass, and an adamantine stone, and an iron pillar, that they
might not tremble at the threats of the people, but with unmoved brow
tread under foot the impudent jeers of their adversaries.”

Lastly, Anselm says here : 44 The righteous look not for marts judg-
ments but for the award of the Eternal Judge, and therefore with Paul
they despise the words of detractors.”

This is what one of the Saints meant when he said, 44 If you wish
to be happy learn to despise and to be despised.” Yea, I judge
not mine own self. I cannot certainly judge myself my works, my
motives, my conscience.

Ver. 4. — For I know nothing by myself, yet am I not hereby justi-
fied. I do not judge myself. For though I am not conscious of
any unfaithfulness in my Apostolic office, yet I am not really just :
I do not mean in the sight of men, for I do not care for their

Digitized by v^,ooQle

JUDGE NOT

judgment: I mean in the sight of God, who perhaps sees in
me sins that I do not Hence S. Basil ( Constit. Monas t. . c. i) says :
“ Although in many things we all offend, yet we have no conception at
all of the greater part of our offences . This is why the Apostle once
said \ 4 I know nothing by myself yet am I not hereby justified ’J Jt is
as if he had said \ 4 1 commit many venial sins of which I am not
aware . 9 For the same reason the prophet said , 4 Who understands his
offences V You will not then be saying what is not true if you call
yourself a sinner .”

From this we can argue against the Protestants that the justified
have no sure knowledge, much less faith that they are justified.
They reply that S. Paul means here that as regards his works he
did not know that he was justified, but that he had a sure know-
ledge of it from faith and Holy Scripture, which promise justification
to every one that believeth on Christ In other words, they say that
they know that they are justified, not because they are free from
sins, and live holy lives, but through God’s mercy accepting their
belief in the free gift of justification by Christ. But this answer of
theirs is frivolous and feigned, for the Apostle goes on to say,

Ver. 5. — Therefore judge nothing before the time , until the Lord come,
who both will bring to light \ &c. He will reveal the thoughts and
actions of men that lie hid in darkness. He means, then, that to
God alone are naked and open the hidden things of man, his
intentions, his secret motives, and the depths of his heart, which
is to him like a bottomless sea, and therefore that none but God
sees man’s justification. None, therefore, save God should judge
another, or even himself, for his faith, his works, or the grace of
Christ. For we often think that we are doing right when we are
acting amiss : we often suppose that we are led by the grace of
Christ, and act out of love for Him, when all the time we are im-
pelled by our own lust or by the love of our own fame. Cf.
Chrysostom and Ambrose and S. Jerome (Dial. 2 contra Felag.).
S. Augustine, too, has some beautiful remarks on this point in his
sermon on Ps. xlii., where he says that the deep of human misery and
blindness calls to the deep of Divine mercy and illumination.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

y6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

This argument is confirmed by the following reflections : (i.) that
God even does not look upon us as justified by works but by faith,
and this, according to the Protestants, we know of as well as God
does; for we believe, they say, by faith. Therefore, according to
them, what the Apostle says is false ; for he says that God alone
knows it and not we. (2.) The words which say that God brings to
light the hidden things of darkness, and makes manifest the counsels
of the hearts, do not mean that God surveys and manifests men’s
faith, but their designs, their motives, and works. (3.) Just as the
nature of our works is uncertain to us, so too is our faith, which
according to Protestants alone justifies : for no man can know for a
certainty that he believes on Christ with a faith that is firm and
Divine, and therefore still less can he know that he is justified by
it The Holy Spirit often says the same elsewhere. C£ EccL ix 1 ;
Prov. xx 9; Job ix. 21 ; Jer. xvii. 9.

Ver. 6 . — And these things , brethren , I have in a figure transferred
to myself &c. “ Above that which is written ” may refer (1.) to

ch. i. 2, 3; or (2.) with S. Chrysostom it may mean “contrary to
that which is written ” in Holy Scripture against pride. It is foolish,
therefore, for the Protestants to abuse this passage into an argument
against tradition. S. Paul evidently means that what he had said
against their idle boasting of the gifts of their teachers, and about
not caring for the applause and opinion of men, but only for God’s,
had been said of them in the person of himself and Apollos. He
had been speaking of others in his own name, so as to avoid offend-
ing any of the Corinthian teachers, or their disciples, by mentioning
their names. That ye might leant in us, therefore, is the expression
of his desire, that when he speaks of himself or Apollos, they may
apply what he said to the other teachers, who had been the occasion
of the schism, of which he and Apollos were guiltless. He urges
the Corinthians by his own example of moderation and conciliatory
disposition not to be puffed up, or boast of one against another, viz.,
for this or that catechist or teacher, by saying, “ I was baptized by
Paul; I was converted by Apollos.” It is, too, an exhortation to
the teachers not to be proud and puffed up because they might be

Digitized by

Google

THE SPIRIT OF FACTION

wiser or more eloquent than other teachers, or boast of their disciples
as being better instructed than those of other teachers, above that
which he had just now written. Do not boast of your own teaching,
nor give occasion of boasting to your disciples, is the gist of this
verse.

For in what follows he is reproving the teachers rather than
disciples ; but he does it in a mild way and under another name,
the teachers, I mean, who had been the chief cause of the empty
contention and divisions among his Corinthian disciples. This
will be seen by reference to ch. v. 15, 18, 19, and also ch. iii. 10,
as well as to the whole of ch. xi. of the Second Epistle. For the
false teachers whom he here speaks of mildly, because they had
not yet disclosed their true nature, are the same apparently as
those that in 2 Cor. xi. he speaks more severely of as impostors,
and guilty of Judaising, and teaching false doctrine. Hence, as
Chrysostom, Theophylact, and (Ecumenius point out, S. Paul first
censures the teachers in the words, “ that ye might learn in us not
to think of men above that which is written,” i.e., that you, teachers,
might learn from me and Apollos that you are, as I, said before,
merely stewards of God. Then he proceeds to rebuke the disciples
in the words, “that no one of you be puffed up for one against
another,” £*., that no disciple boast of his teacher as wiser or more
eloquent than another. S. Paul, then, while he seems to continue
his address to the Corinthians, is in them and through them re-
proving their teachers. Just so a tutor endowed with tact and
judgment will, when he wishes to chide a king’s sons, chide their
servants, as if they were guilty, that so the princes may take it to
themselves.

The expression " puffed up, ” to describe one that is proud and
swollen with arrogance, is a figure borrowed from wine skins. They
are said to be puffed out when by being filled with air they resemble
in form and size a solid body. Similarly, the proud man who is well
satisfied with his knowledge, or eloquence, or some such gift, but
within is devoid of all such powers, is just like a wine-skin that is
swollen out with wind.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

78 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

Ver. 7 . — For who makeih thee to differ from another ? 1. The

Greek word denotes as much the act of placing a man above others
as separating him and dividing him off from them. So Theophy-
lact paraphrases it, “ By whose suffrage was it that this separation
and pre-eminence was given thee ? ” It was not of men, but of God.
It is God’s to make to differ and to judge, and therefore you ought
not to care for man’s judgment So understood, these words hark
back to ver. 4.

2. But it is better to understand them : Who gives you any pre-
eminence over the herd of your fellow-Christians, O Corinthian cate-
chumen? No one but yourself, who are puffed up, because you
think that you have been baptized and taught by one that is a more
holy, eloquent, and wise teacher than others : even so it does not
follow that you share in his good qualities. It is this schismatic
spirit that the Apostle has before him, as is evident from what has
gone before, and as is pointed out by Ambrose, Anselm, and
Theodoret.

3. But what, it seems to me, is most within the scope of the

Apostle’s aim, who, as I said, is addressing the teachers, & this :
Who, O teacher, makes you to differ from another, as to be a better
teacher and a better Christian, but yourself, who vainly extol your
own wisdom and eloquence above that of others, or of your followers
whom you have taught, as Psaphon did his birds, to sing your
praises ? If you say, “ It is my labour, my zeal and industry, that
mark me off from others,” I answer, “What hast thou that thou
didst not receive ? n Thy talent for labour, thy abilities, and all the
natural gifts of which you boast came to you from God. Much
more came from Him thy supernatural gifts; therefore to Him give
all the glory. S. Ephrem (de Fanitentid) wisely says : 44 Offer to
God what is not thine own, that He may give thee what is His.”
Hence the Council of Arausica (Can. 22) lays down that we have
nothing of our own except falsehood and sin. This is the literal
sense, and the Apostle’s meaning. ,

Nevertheless, we must take notice that S. Augustine frequently.
Prosper, Fulgentius and the Council of Arausica (Can. 6) transfer

Digitized by v^,ooQle

JUSTIFICATION FROM GOD

these words of the Apostle’s by parity of reasoning from the natural
gifts of eloquence and wisdom, primarily referred to here, to the
supernatural gifts of grace, and to God’s predestination. If, they
say, natural gifts and good works achieved by natural strength alone,
as well as the labour, zeal, and industry of teachers, effect nothing
for grace and holiness ; and if those gifts do not warrant a man in
boasting himself of his natural abilities, much less will they allow
him to glory in the sphere of the supernatural, that they have made
him holy, or more holy than others. This is the reason why S.
Augustine refers these words to grace and predestination, in the
sense that no one can separate himself from the mass of sinful
human nature and make a beginning of his own salvation, by his
own efforts and his own natural strength, as the Pelagians and Semi-
pelagians held.

It is, then, not the powers of nature but God that separates the
man justified from the man not justified ; for God is the great First
Cause of all the gifts that the justified has, in such a way that he
has nothing to mark him off from the non-justified, save what he has
received from God. He is, therefore, debarred from all boasting.
This, however, does not remove the fact that all this at the same time
depends for its efficacy on the free co-operation of our wilL For as
S. Augustine lays down, through free-will assisted by grace, he who is
converted can separate himself from him that is not. He says (de
Spir, et Lit, c. 34) : “ To yield to the call of God , or to resist it, is an
act of my own will. And this not only does not weaken the force of
the words, 1 What hast thou that thou didst not receive V it even
strengthens them. The soul cannot receive and have the gifts spoken
of here except by consenting ; and through this consent what it has,
and what it receives, are of God, For to receive and to have are the
acts of one that receives and has” In other words they are the acts
of one that consents freely to the grace of God calling him. S.
Bernard (de Grat, et lib, Arbit.) says tersely: " What God gives to
our free-will can no more be given without the consent of the receiver
than without the grace of the Giver,”

If then it be asked : What makes a man that believes to differ

Digitized by v^,ooQle

So FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

from one that refuses to believe, it being understood that each
received from God an equal grace of calling to faith, — I should
reply : He that believes does so through free-will, and not through
his natural powers, as Pelagius supposed, and through the strength
given him by Grace he makes himself to differ from one that
believes not For it was in his own power to assent, or not to
assent, to grace, and therefore to believe or not to believe : when,
then, he believes, he does so freely : he assents freely to the grace of
God ; he freely distinguishes himself from him that believes not.

It may be said that he can boast himself, then, of having so dis-
tinguished himself from the other. But I answer that boasting is ex-
cluded, since he should attribute the chief glory, nay, the whole to
God, by whose grace he has so separated himself. The reason is that
by the strength of grace alone, not by natural powers, did he perform,
or have power to do, or to wish for, the act by which he separated
himself! From the same source came his strength for the embracing
of grace, which is not distinguishable from assent to it, and for any
attempt, or movement, or inclination towards it For in that act
there is not the least ground for saying that it has been effected by the
power of free-will alone ; for the whole of it, as far as its substance and
real modes is concerned, is of grace and all of free-will ; just as every
work is wholly from God as its first cause, and wholly also from its
secondary cause. But from grace it has it that it is supernatural
and meritorious, and thence comes all its worth ; it has from free-
will its freedom only. As, then, the act itself and the co-operation
of free-will spring from grace exciting them and co-operating with
them, a man can no more boast of his co-operation and election
than a beggar who is offered a hundred pieces of gold can boast
of his having accepted them. And all that the Apostle means is
that no one can so boast himself of anything as though he had not
received it from God. Otherwise, all virtue by itself and the
virtuous man by himself, are worthy of praise and honour; but
this praise and virtue must be attributed to God; for whoever
converts himself and separates himself from others does so not by
his own natural abilities but by the power of the grace of God.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

PRIDE IN BOASTING

Nor is it to be said that the Apostle’s meaning is otherwise from
the fact of his speaking literally, as I said before, of differences in
wisdom, eloquence, and other natural gifts, which undeniably a man
can acquire, or excel in by his own labours, zeal, and industry, and
so make himself to differ from others less learned, and can also
therefore give his own labour and zeal the credit, and boast
moderately of his advancement The Apostle is merely excluding
that boasting which arises from pride and contempt of others : as
if, for instance, you were to arrogantly boast that what you have is
your own and came not from God. This is evidently S. Paul’s
meaning, from the words he adds : “ Now if thou didst receive it,
why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it ? ” Ifj then, you
accommodate this sentence to supernatural things, it only excludes,
according to S. Paul’s meaning, that boasting which arises from a
pride despising others, attributing all to itself, and not referring
everything to God and His grace as the first Well-spring of all.
But you do not do this if you say that by the power of God’s grace
you have freely distinguished and divided yourself from sinners
who prefer to remain in their sin ; for you then give the praise and
glory first and last to God and His grace. All the same, however,
free-will has its own praise and glory, though that praise and glory,
be it recollected, was received by the grace of God.

From what has been said it follows that he who is converted is to
be distinguished from him who is not, and that he is converted as
well by grace as by free-will. For although both have prevenient
grace, which is often equally exerted on many, yet the one has as
well co-operating grace, which is wanting to the other who has no
wish to be converted, and by this he is freely distinguished from
the other and converted. Moreover, it was foreseen that his pre-
venient grace would be effectual in him here and now ; and because
God foresaw this, He predestinated him to it, knowing that with
it he would most surely co-operate and be converted: but such
grace He does not give to another man who is not converted. We
are, therefore, in general to think of this as the actual cause of our

conversion and salvatioa For this effectual grace is peculiar to
voa i. f

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

the predestinate and the elect, if only it remains with them to the
end of their life, as S. Augustine says. Hence, it is clear that it is
not so much free-will as grace that divides the just from the unjust :
for grace effects the conversion and justification of the righteous
man who does not hinder the efficacious working of grace, but freely
consents to it But grace does not do this with the unjust, because
he places an opposing barrier in the way of grace in refusing to
consent to it and co-operate with it, and so grace becomes in him
ineffectual and vain. Wherefore S. Ephrem’s advice in c. io of the
tractate, il Look to thyself,” is wise, “ Have charity with all, and
abstain from all.” For these two, benevolence and continence, are
the principal marks of holiness, which soften the most barbarous
of men and bind them to themselves.

Ver. 8. — Now ye are full. This is, as Chrysostom, Theophylact,
and Anselm say, ironical. Ye are filled with wisdom and grace, and
the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and so it is your boast that you are not
so much Corinthians as teachers, having nothing further to learn of
Christianity. You think yourselves perfect as teachers when you
are scarcely disciples at all of the true and perfect wisdom. S.
Chrysostom says, " To be satisfied with little is the mark of a weak
mind: and to think one's self rich by a small addition of means is
the mark of one that is sick and miserable ; but true godliness is
never satisfied ”

S. Thomas notices that S. Paul here points out four kinds of pride
in the Corinthians, or rather in their teachers. First, when one
thinks that he has from himself and not from God whatever good he
possesses : this is alluded to in the words, “ Why dost thou glory as
if thou hadst not received it?” In these words also is contained
the second, which is, when any one attributes to his own merits
whatever good he has. The third is when one boasts that he has
what he has not, and this is touched in the words, “ Now ye are full ;
now ye are rich.” The fourth is when one despises others, and
wishes to stand in a class by himself : this is pointed at in the
words, “ Ye have reigned as kings without us.”

Ye have reigned as kings without us. Without our help, you think,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE APOSTOLIC LIFE

O Corinthians, that you triumphantly excel over all God’s saints;
and especially you, O teachers, as if you had been given a kingdom,
claim for yourselves, while excluding us, a supreme dignity.

And I would to God that ye did reign, that we also might reign
with you . As your followers and rivals, or better as being your
fathers: for this as a matter of fact we are. So Theophylact,
Chrysostom, and Anselm. He does not decline to have partners
in the kingdom of God, i.e, in the government of the Church ; he
only requires them to rule as they ought, that is, to devote them-
selves to the salvation of the faithful

Ver. 9. — For I think that God hath set forth us, the Apostles, last,
as it were appointed to death. (1.) He contrasts himself and the
true Apostles with those vain teachers who sought their own glory
and their own advantage. I would, he says, that we Apostles
were reigning with you ; for so far, I think, are we from reigning
triumphantly, that God has exhibited us to the world as the last
and most despised of all, as though destined to a well-deserved
death. (2.) The simpler meaning is, we are the last to have been
sent into the world in these last times. We have been marked out
by God for death, as, e.g., by means of wild beasts — not for a king-
dom or triumphs, but for death, persecution, and martyrdom. So
Tertullian understands it

Observe that the Apostles are called last, as compared with those
Prophets that went before them, as Isaiah and Jeremiah and others,
who were sent by God as Apostles to the Jews and others (Isa. vi. 9).
Especially does he call himself last of all, as having been called to his
Apostleship by Christ ascended, after the other Apostles had been
called by Christ living on the earth.

Moreover, “set forth” denotes (1.) marked out, (2.) made or ex-
hibited, and, as Ephrem terms it, appointed Cf. Ps. lx. 3 and lxxi.
20. (3.) It denotes put forward publicly as an example to others.
Hence it follows —

For we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to
men. They were placed, as it were, in a theatre, like those con-
demned to die by fighting with wild beasts before the eyes of the

Digitized by

Google

84 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.. G IV.

populace. There seems to be an allusion here to the public games
of Rome and other places, where men fought with wild beasts in
the arena. The world, he says, delights to regard us as fools,
dealers in secret arts, or babblers of novelties, or better still, as
men condemned to the beasts.

Observe that “the world” here is a generic name for “angels
and men ; n for they were the only beings to gaze upon the Apostles.
Hence, in the Greek, “world” has the article, and the two other
terms are without it. We are made, he says, to the good angels an
object of compassionate regard, as well as of worthy admiration and
honour. But since evil angels and evil men rejoice in our being
despised, persecuted, and put to death, we are made a spectacle to
evil angels of hatred and rejoicing, as well as of confusion and terror.
To good men we are a spectacle and example of fortitude, faith,
innocence, patience, meekness, constancy, and holiness of life. So
Titelmann.

S. Chrysostom ( Horn . 12 in Mora/.) applies this to the theatre of
this life, in which we do everything in the presence of God. So,
Suetonius says, S. Augustine, when about to die, said to his friends
standing round him, “ Have I played my part pretty well on this
stage and in this theatre ? ” — “ Very well,” his friends replied. Then
he rejoined, “Applaud me, therefore, as I take my departure ; ” and
having said this he gave up the ghost. Better and still more appro-
priate was the use of these words made by Edmund Campian, Eng-
land’s noble martyr, well named Campianus, a true wrestler and
champion of Christ, who, when about to suffer martyrdom, publicly
gave out these words as the text of his last sermon. Such a theatri-
cal spectacle was what the Apostle here primarily intends. Cicero
says (qu. 2, Tucsul.) that there is no fairer sight than that of a vir-
tuous and conscientious life, and so among Christians there is
nothing more beautiful than martyrdom.

The illustrious Paula appositely and piously replied, as S. Jerome
says in his eulogy of her, to some caviller who suggested that she
might be considered by some insane, because of the fervour of her
virtues : “ We are made a spectacle unto the world and to angels

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CHRISTIAN’S ARENA

and to men ; we are fools for Christ’s sake ; but the foolishness of
God is wiser than mem Hence, too, the Saviour said to His Father,
4 Thou knowest My foolishness ! * and again, * I was made as it
were a monster unto many, but be Thou My strong helper. I
became as a beast before Thee, and I am always with Thee.’”

Lastly, S. Chrysostom (in Ep. ad Rom . Horn. 17) teaches from
this that we ought to fly from eye- service, that is, from serving
the eyes of men, that so we turn our eyes towards the eyes of God,
and live perpetually in His sight and before Him. There are, he
says, two theatres : one most spacious, where sits the King of kings,
surrounded by His shining hosts, to view us ; the other most insig-
nificant, where stand a few Ethiopians, men ignorant of what
is going on. It is, therefore, the height of madness to pass by this
most spacious theatre of God and of the angels,, and to be content
with the theatre of a few Ethiopians, and laboriously to strive to
please them. When you have a theatre erected for you in the
heavens, why do you gather together spectators for yourself on
earth? S. Bernard ( Serm . 31 inter parvos) treats these words
somewhat differently, though his application of them is the same.
He says: “ We are made a spectacle unto the world, \ to angels and
to men , good and bad alike . The passion of envy inflames the one ,
the compassion bom of pity makes the others minister to us con-
tinually; the one desires to see our fall , the other out upward flight .
We are undoubtedly halfway between heaven and hell, between the
cloister and the world Both consider diligently what we do, both say,
‘ Would that he would join usl } Their intention is different, but
their wishes , perhaps, not unlike . But if the eyes of all are thus
upon us, whither have our friends gone, or why did they alone go
from u$ f . . . Let us, then, before it is too late, brethren, rise, nor
receive in vain our souls for which, whether for good or evil, others
so zealously watch ”

Ver. 10. — We are fools for Chrisfs sake, but ye are wise in Christ
This is a continuation of the irony of ver. 8. We are reckoned
fools because of Christ crucified, whom we preach, and for whose
sake we seem to expose ourselves rashly to so many dangers. For

Digitized by

Google

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

the Cross is to the Greeks foolishness. But you in your own eyes
are wise in the Gospel of Christ, because of the eloquence and
philosophy which you mingle with it, and because you take care to
so preach Christ that you run no risk for His sake.

We are weak , as bearing without resistance many grievous adver-
sities, such as hunger, thirst, nakedness, toils, injuries, cursings,
persecutions, as is said in ver. n.

But ye are strong. For you easily by your worldly eloquence,
wisdom, and friendship turn the edge of all evils that attack you.

Ye are honourable , but we are despised. You are honoured, we are
held in no honour. He teaches modestly, but yet sternly by his
own example as a teacher, that the Christian’s boast must not be in
renown, wealth, wisdom, eloquence, or the applause of men, but in
being despised by others, and in despising glory, and in the Cross
of Christ; and especially is this true of the Christian teacher and
preacher. So S. Chrysostom. And in this way he endeavours to
shame these self-indulgent, vain, and luxurious teachers, and also the
Corinthians who preferred to follow such men, rather than the
Apostles of Christ, who were giving for them their strength, their
substance, and their lives. So Isaiah (viii. 18) says, in the name of
himself and the other Prophets, as well as of Paul and the Apostles,
“ Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for
signs and for wonders in Israel” And as the Annales Minorum
relate, S. Francis used to say that he was a despised fool of Christ’s
in the world, and was for this beloved of Christ Himself.

Ver. 1 1. — Even unto this present hour we . . . have no certain
dwellingplace. This remarkable description of the Apostle’s life is
very like that contained in the Second Epistle (xi. 23), which those
that are called to the ministry ought to put before them as an
example, as the Apostolic men of great zeal do in England, Holland,
India, and Japan.

S. Chrysostom {Horn, 52 on Acts of the Apostles) says excellently
on the words of xxvi. 29 : “ Such is the soul that is raised on high by
celestial love that it thinks itself a prisoner for Christ because of the
greatness of the promised glory. For as one in love has no eyes for any

Digitized by

Google

THE POWER OF LOVE

save her he loves, who is to him everything, so he who has been laid
hold of by Christs fire becomes like one who should be living alone on
the earth, caring nothing for glory and shame. For he so utterly
despises temptations and scourgings and imprisonment that it is as
though another body endured them, or as though he possessed a body
made of granite. For he laughs at those things which are pleasant in
this life ; he does not feel their force as we do ; his body is to him as
the body of one dead. So far is he from being taken captive by any
passion, as gold that has been purified in the fire is from showing any
stain. All this is effected by the love of man for God, when it is
great” But we do not attain this height because we are cold, and
ignorant of this Divine philosophy. The philosopher Diogenes saw
this, though but darkly and afar off, for when he was asked what
men were the noblest, he replied, “They that despise riches and
glory and pleasure and life; they that draw their force from the
opposite things to these, from poverty, obscurity, hunger, thirst, toil
and death.” Diogenes saw this, but could not practise it, for he was
himself a slave to vain-glory.

Ver. 12. — Being reviled, we bless . Infidels and Jews mock us,
and call down imprecations on us, saying, “ Let these new preachers
of a crucified God be slain, let them perish and hang on the
accursed cross.” We, however, pray for their peace, that God would
give them His light, His grace, and salvation. S. Basil (in Reg.
Brevior. 226) points out that to do evil and to do good are connoted
by reviling and blessing. He says : u We are bidden to be patient
towards all, and to return kindly deeds to those who persecute us
unjustly. We are to Icve fervently, not only those that curse us, but
whosoever shows us unkindness in any way whatever, that so we may
obey the precept, ‘ Be not overcome with evil, but overcome evil with
good l ”

Ver. 13. — Being defamed, we entreat. When we are reviled,
called evil dealers in evil arts, and railed at. The word “blas-
pheme” has this meaning also in Tit. iii. 2. When thus treated
we speak with meekness after the manner of suppliants, as the
Greek Fathers take it, or else we entreat God for them. But the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

first is nearer the Greek. S. Basil (Reg. 226, quoted above) renders
it “comfort,” in the sense of filling their minds with a perception of
the truth. Comfort is used in this sense in Rom. i. 12.

We are made as the filth of the world. We are made, as
Theophylact and Theodoret say, as it were the excrement of the
world — not once, but always, down to this present hour. We are
made like filth that has been collected from all sides, is the literal
force of the Greek. We are reckoned as most contemptible, as
wretches unworthy of man’s society, fit only to be driven away and
destroyed.

S. Paul is here alluding to Lam. iii 45 : “Thou hast made us as
the offscouring and refuse in the midst of the people.” For Jere-
miah was imprisoned by the Jews, cast off, and rejected, and so
was a type of Paul and the Apostles, imprisoned, rejected, and at
length slain by the Jews and Gentiles.

But Gagneius and others translate this word “ expiatory victims.”
Hence S. Ambrose, too, commenting on Ps. cxix. 8, reads it, “We
are made for the world’s purging.” We should notice that the
Greek word here used was applied to the wicked men and others
doomed to sacrifice by the Gentiles, in order to get rid of famine or
tempests or any other public calamity. So, for instance, did the
Decii devote themselves for their country, and Curtius, who, to
banish a common plague and appease the Deity, leaped in full
armour into a gulf in Rome. So, too, Servius, on the line of the
JEneid, “ O accursed thirst for gold, to what villainy do you not
impel the hearts of men?” notes that famine is called accursed
or sacred after the manner of the Gauls. For when the citizens
of Marseilles were suffering from pestilence, a certain poor man
offered himself to the state to be fed for a full year on the best
food at the public expense, and then to be led through the city with
execration, clothed with evergreens and sacred garments, that on his
head might fall all the evils of the state ; and then he was either
sacrificed or drowned. Hence Budseus, following Suidas and others,
says that KaOapfiara were men dedicated to death, and thrown into
the sea, bearing the burden of all the wickedness of the state, and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE APOSTLES VICTIMS

so sacrificed to Neptune, with the words added : “ Be thou our
expiatory victim.” Such a victim was the goat sent into the wilder-
ness by the Hebrews (Lev. xvi. 21). But the Greek and Latin
versions support the first meaning in preference, and that gives the
more literal and simple sense. For S. Paul is here treating of the
contempt meted out to him and his companions, whereby they were
spumed by tongue and foot as the vilest wretches living.

And are the off scouring of all things unto this day . Offscouring
is the* translation of a word which denotes such things as scabs,
nail-parings, and such worthless things as are cast aside and trod-
den under foot by all. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm.
CEcumenius understands it to mean a little rag or cloth by which
sweat is wiped off the face; others follow Budaeus, and take it to
mean “ expiatory victim,” as I have said. This is supported, too,
by the Syriac Version.

Vers. 14, 15. — I write not these things . • . for in Christ Jesus
I have begotten you through the Gospel And therefore I alone am
your spiritual father. Other teachers are but schoolmasters who
educate the child sent them by the father. Paul hints that the
Corinthians should be ashamed of themselves for passing by the
Apostles, who had converted them to Christ, and who were suffering
so much for their sake, and for following after vain-glorious teachers,
and for wishing to be called their disciples,

Ver. 17. — Who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways.
My doctrine and Christian life, say S. Thomas and Anselm.

In Christ In Christ’s religion.

Ver. 20. — For the Kingdom of God is not in word but in power.
The spiritual energy and Christian, and especially Apostolic per-
fection, in which God reigns, and displays in us and in the Church
the effectual working of the Gospel of His grace and Spirit, are not
to be found in eloquence, but in the powerful working of the Holy
Spirit, viz., in convincing speech, in the power of miracles, in the
expulsion of demons, and, as Theophylact and Cajetan say, still
more in the sufferings of the Apostle’s life described in vers. 9-1 1,
and in conversion of character and in holy living. So, too, say S.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IV.

Chrysostom and Anselm : For S. John Baptist did no miracle, and
yet began to preach the Kingdom of God in the power of a holy
life, in the spirit and efficacy of preaching and exhortation. Cf. the
parallel expression in Rom. xiv. 17.

Ver. 21. — What will ye ? Shall I come unto you with a rod l
Such as becomes the father I spoke of in ver. 15. The rod is
a symbol of severity of rebuke and power of punishing. So Chry-
sostom, Theophylact, Anselm.

Observe here the power of punishing lodged in the Church and
her prelates, and exercised by Paul in the next chapter. CEcumenius
and Cajetan refer these words of the Apostle's to the next chapter,
in which he sternly rebukes the Corinthians for the incest of the
fornicator. However, these words can well be joined with the pre-
ceding, in which he reproved the Corinthians for their pride.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER V

I The incestuous person 6 is cause rather of shame unto them , than of rejoicing.
7 The old leaven is to be purged out. io Heinous offenders are to be shunned
and avoided.

I T is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornica-
tion as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have
his father’s wife.

2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done
this deed might be taken away from among you.

3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already,
as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,

4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and
my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,

5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the
spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the
whole lump ?

7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are
unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us :

8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the
leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity
and truth.

9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators :
io Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous,
or extortioners, or with idolaters ; for then must ye needs go out of the world.

II But now I have written unto* you not to keep company, if any man that
is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a
drunkard, or an extortioner ; with such an one no not to eat

12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye
judge them that are within ?

13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among
yourselves that wicked person.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

L The Apostle proceeds from the schism of the Corinthians to deal with
the scandal caused by incest among them : he blames them for
allowing one living openly in incest to remain among them, and
orders them to excommunicate him and hand him over to Satan.

9 *

Digitized by v^,ooQle

9 2

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. V.

ii. He bids them (ver. 6) purge out this and any other leaven of sin, in
order that they may with purity celebrate the everlasting Passover,
and so eat the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth,
iil. He orders them (ver. 9) not to mingle with Christians that are open
sinners; but as for heathens and unbelievers, he says that they are
not under the jurisdiction of him or of the Church.

Ver. 1 . — It is reported commonly among you . It is no vague

rumour, but a well-ascertained fact.

1. The Gentiles who were not barbarians, but living civilised and
honest lives, by natural instinct rejected all such intercourse of a
step-son and step-mother. The poets praise Hippolytus for pre-
ferring to incur the anger of his father, Theseus, rather than yield
to the lust of his step-mother, Phaedra. When he was solicited by
Phaedra and refused to consent to the abomination, he was falsely
accused by her to his father of having solicited her, and was tom
asunder by him by four horses. There is, however, extant an
example of such intercourse in Valerius Maximus (lib. v. De Par .
Amore in Lib .), in the case of King Seleucus, who, on learning from
his physician that his son Antiochus was sick unto death from love
of his wife Stratonice, handed her over to him.

2. Theodoret, in his preface to this epistle, and Chrysostom here
say that this fornicator was an eminent and powerful leader of the
schism at Corinth, and this is why the Apostle proceeds so directly
from the one sin to the other.

It may be asked whether this incestuous person took his father's
wife during his lifetime or afterwards. Some reply that he was
dead; but it seems more likely that he was living, from the phrase
used, “his father’s wife,” and also from the words of 2 Cor. vii. 12 :
“ I did it not for his cause that had done the wrong, nor for his
cause that suffered wrong,” which seems plainly to mean the father.
Anselm and others take the view that the father was still alive. The
man, therefore, was at once incestuous and an adulterer, and was
obstinate in his sin ; for without such obstinacy he would not have
been excommunicated.

Ver. 2 . — And ye are puffed up . You meanwhile are so occupied
with your contentious pride that you neglect to correct this inces-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE

tuous person by removing him from your society. So Chrysostom,
Theophylact, and Anselm. Learn from this how careful not only
prelates but all the faithful should be to remove from the Church
scandals and their authors.

Vers. 3, 4. — For I verily as absent in body ... in the name of our
Lord Jesus Christ. As it behoves a Pastor and Bishop to be always
present by vigilant care, even though absent in body from the Church,
I have already judged \ i.e., determined ; and by these words I now
order that he be excommunicated and handed over to Satan, and
that in the name of Christ, by His authority which I wield when I
order and judge.

Chrysostom refers the clause in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ
to what follows, when ye are gathered together. Paul means that
they were to assemble, and in a public congregation of the Church
they were to excommunicate the incestuous person. This clause,
thirdly, may be referred to the words to deliver such an one to Satan;
such delivery and execution of the sentence would be done in the
power, name, and place of Christ

Vers. 4, 5. — When ye are gathered together . . . deliver such an
one unto Satan. I determine and order, O Corinthians, that when
you are assembled in the Church, where I shall be present in my
spirit, i.e. f in mind, affection, and the authority given me by Christ,
this incestuous person be excommunicated and handed over to Satan,
who rules outside the Church, and is wont in this world to afflict
the excommunicate not only in soul but also in body. It plainly
appears from these words that the heretics are wrong in saying
that the power of excommunicating resides in the whole congrega-
tion, and not in the prelates. On the contrary, he says, I have
judged. All that the Apostle means is that the excommunication
is to be publicly pronounced by whoever was presiding over the
Church, that others might fear to do the like. Hence, he does
not say that they were to assemble and hand him over to Satan,
but when ye are gathered together I have determined to hand him
over to Satan, i.e., through him who in the name of Christ is in
charge of your Church in my place, and whose, therefore, it is to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. V.

hand him over. In every state judgment takes place, not by the
popular voice, but by the judges and magistrates.

The Apostle, moreover, uses this phrase to denote that this
spiritual power had been given to the Church, and was exercised
by himself and by prelates in the name of the Church, not in
the sense that the whole Church has received it directly from
Christ, but that Christ gave it to Paul and the other Apostles,
not for themselves, but for the good of the Church; for as great
confusion would ensue if each one had to be asked to give his
sentence, the whole Church discharges this duty by the hands of
its heads and rulers. Again, as excommunicating is liable to cause
hatred, Paul wishes it to be done with the consent of the whole
Church, that so he may win all to his side, and none may protect
the powerful fornicator and accuse Paul of over severity. Hence
he leaves, as it were, the judgment to them of his own free-will,
and out of his modesty he makes them the assessors, approvers,
and executors of the sentence pronounced by him of public ex-
communication of the fornicator by the hands of their president
So often prudent princes and generals will in a difficult and danger-
ous matter, when any great officer is to be punished, seek the
opinion of other great officers, and what is more, leave the
judging of him to them. So Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theophylact,
Anselm.

With the power of our Lord Jesus Christ Connect this with
deliver , or, better still, as Ambrose does, with when ye are gathered
together and my spirit In other words, in this act of excommunica-
tion the Spirit is present with you, and still more with my spirit
For Christ has given His mighty power to His Church, and so
the Church can, by her rulers and prelates, excommunicate and
deliver over to Satan the contumacious.

Ver. 5. — To deliver such an one to Satan . Theophylact thinks
that by these words Paul actually excommunicates the fornicator,
but it is truer to say that by them he orders his excommunication to
be carried out by the prelates in the Corinthian Church. If other-
wise, he would have said, “ I deliver,” instead of “ I have judged

Digitized by v^,ooQle

EXCOMMUNICATION 95

to deliver ; ” and the same is borne out by his bidding that he be
delivered over to Satan in public assembly of the Church.

1. Observe that the ancients understood this passage of the
power and act of excommunicating which is lodged in the prelates
of the Church. So Chrysostom, Anselm, Augustine, and others,
quoted by Baronius, p. 448, a.d. 57.

2. The excommunicate are said to be delivered over to Satan,
because being ejected from the fellowship of Christ and His
Church, and being deprived of all its benefits, its prayers, suffrages,
sacrifices, and Sacraments, of the protection of God, and of the care
of pastors, they are exposed to the tyranny and assaults of the
devil, whose rule is outside the Church, and who goes about against
them more than before, and impels them to every kind of evil
Cf. Ambrose, Augustine (lib. iii. Ep. contra Parmen . c. 2), Jerome
(Ep. 1 ad Jde/iod.), Innocent (apud S. Aug. Ep. 51).

For the destruction of the flesh. 1. That the devil may harass him
with bodily sickness, wounds, and diseases ; that his flesh may be
brought low and its vigour be destroyed ; that being thus humiliated
he may learn wisdom. So say Theodoret, Chrysostom, Theophylact,
(Ecumenius, Anselm.

2. Ambrose and Anselm here, and S. Augustine in the passage
just cited, explain it to mean, for the destruction of the pleasure of
the body through this confusion and shame. But though shame
may restrain a man from the external act when there is danger of
its being commonly known, yet it does not do away with the inner
desire of the heart, and therefore the first meaning, which is supported
by more Fathers, is the more true and suitable.

From these Fathers we gather, though some deny it, that the
excommunicate were formally handed over to the devil, and also
corporally vexed and possessed by him, that they might learn to
fear excommunication. Theodoret says this expressly here, and also
at 1 Tim. iv. 20, and Ambrose too there says that this was the tra-
dition of his forefathers, and that this is the strict meaning of “the
destruction 6f the flesh.” Frequent examples of diabolic possession
are to be found in the lives of the Fathers, and especially in the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

9 6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. V.

life of S. Ambrose by Paulinus. When Ambrose had delivered
a certain man to Satan, the devil at that very moment seized him
and began to tear him. For this reason Christ, in S. Matt x., gave,
S. Thomas says, to the Apostles power over unclean spirits, both to
expel them from and to admit them into men's bodies to vex them.
For other examples, cf. Delrio de Magia (lib. iii. p. i, qu. 7), Petr.
Phyraeus (De Damon . p. ii. c. 30), Lerarius (in Tob . c. 6, qu. 20).

That the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus . That
the soul and mind, gaining from this punishment wisdom and
renewal, may be saved in the day of judgment Hence it appears
that the end of excommunication should be borne in mind, which
is to cause the excommunicate shame and distress, that he may be
humiliated, and ask to be received back, and seek for pardon from
God and the Church. The faithful, therefore, should pray secretly
for him, and endeavour to win him back to unity.

Ver. 6. — Your glorying is not good. Your boasting yourselves
in your worldly wisdom, which makes you say, 44 1 am of Paul,” 44 1
of Apollos,” is evil and out of place. It were better for you to cast
down the eyes of your mind, since you allow so great a wickedness to
exist among you. So Anselm ; Theophylact adds from Chrysostom:
“He implies obscurely and in a homely way that the Corinthians
themselves prevented this fornicator from coming to a better mind, by
glorying in his name ; for he was one of their wise teachers”

A little leaven leavenefh the whole lump . As yeast penetrates
every part of a mass of dough with its taste and sharpness, so does
this one taint of the fornicator penetrate and stain all of you:
firstly, because for the sake of one man the wrath of God may be
kindled against you all, and against the whole Church which suffers
him, as Ambrose and Anselm say ; and secondly, if this man go un-
punished, others may follow his example, and this one may cause many
to stumble. So S. Chrysostom. In other words, remove this scandal,
and separate the man from the Church by excommunicating him.

Ver. 7. — Purge out , therefore , the old leaven. Eject this fornicator
from your society, lest like leaven he infect the whole. It follows
that not the predestinate alone, or hidden sinners, but that public

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE OLD AND NEW LEAVEN

sinners, like this fornicator, are in the Church till they are excom-
municated. So Chrysostom. Although the Apostle refers primarily
to the incest of the fornicator, yet Chrysostom and Anselm under-
stand leaven more generally to be fornication, and its concealment,
and any kind of wickedness and vice, which by parity of reasoning
the Apostle orders to be removed from the soul of every individual
and from the whole Church.

That ye may be a new lump . That your Church may be once
more pure.

As ye are unleavened As Chrysostom and Anselm say, as by
baptism you were made unleavened, i.e., pure from the leaven of
sin, so consequently you are, or ought to be, from thenceforth
unleavened, or pure and holy, by calling and profession. It is a
Hebraism to say that what ought to be is ; and Christians accord-
ingly are frequently called Saints, because they ought to be. Others
take ye are strictly to mean that, excepting the one incestuous
person, they were all unleavened or pure.

This unleavenedness of heart and life is put before each one at
baptism, both in words and ceremonies, by the Church, when, after
signing the head with the sacred Chrism, she clothes the newly
baptized person with a white robe, and, holding out a lighted candle,
says to him : “ Receive this holy and spotless white robe, and may
you keep it without spot till you take it before the tribunal of our
Lord Jesus Christ, and may you gain eternal life and live for ever
and ever. Amen/ Or as S. Jerome has it in his letter to Damasus :
“ Receive this burning and blameless light, guard well thy baptism,
keep God’s commandments, that when the Lord cometh to the
wedding thou mayest meet Him, together with all His Saints, in the
court of heaven ; and mayest thou gain eternal life and live for
ever and ever. Amen.” By the white robe and the lighted candle
are signified (i.) a pure and exemplary life and conversation; (2.)
freedom from the power of sin and the devil; (3.) victory and
triumph over them ; for the Romans used to give their servants a
white robe when they set them free, white being the colour of
triumph. Of this garment S. Ambrose (Lib. de Its qui Initial, c. 7),

VOL. 1. G

Digitized by v^,ooQle

98 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. V.

addressing the newly baptized, says: “You have received white
garments for a testimony that you have cast away the slough of
sins, and put on the holy garb of innocence.” Paulinus thus sings
of the same thing : —

“ Thence from the sacred font the priest their father brings
The infants, snowy-white in body, heart, and dress.”

Cf. also S. Augustine, Lactantius, and Victor of Utica, whose words
I quoted on Rom. vi. 4.

Hence the Saturday and Sunday immediately after Easter Day
are called Sabbatum in albis and Dominica in albis , because the
neophytes then used to lay aside their white garments. Yet, as
Baronius has rightly pointed out (a.d. 58, p. 606), they received a
white Agnus Dei as it was called, made of paschal wax, and blessed
by the Bishop, and wore it hung from their neck, that they might
be ever reminded of purity and innocence, and might learn from
Christ, the Paschal Lamb, to be thenceforth in every work unleavened,
pure, meek, and lowly of heart

For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. The word for
denotes : I rightly adjure you to be unleavened and pure, because
you are keeping the Passover, in which the Jews had no leavened
thing. As the Passover was a type of Christ, so were the un-
leavened loaves a type of the baptismal innocence and pure life
of Christians. The Apostle’s argument is based on the allegorical
meaning of the Passover and the unleavened bread.

The word Passover has its rise from the passing over of the angel
of the houses of the Israelites when he saw the blood of the lamb
that had been sacrificed for the purpose smeared on the doorposts.
Then by a happy metonymy the lamb sacrificed is called the Pass-
over, or the Passover victim, the victim slain for the passing over
of the angel. Then, too, the day itself and the feast at which this
happened, and its annual memorial are called the Passover.

Allegorically this lamb signified Christ. Our Passover, i.e., our
Paschal Lamb, Christ, was sacrificed for us, that as many as are
washed with the Blood of His Passion in baptism and the other

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHRIST OUR PASSOVER

Sacraments may be defended in safety from the destroying angel,
who passes over them, and lights upon the unbelieving and the
wicked, who have not been washed with the blood of Christ, to kill
them with eternal death. For Christ has rescued those that have
been so washed from Pharaoh’s yoke, that is, from the yoke of the
devil and of sin, and having set them perfectly free He has loaded
them with all gifts and graces, and daily is adding more.

S. Bernard ( Serm . i in die Pasch.) thus moralises on this
passage : “ Christy our Passover , is sacrificed '. Let us embrace those
virtues commended to us by His Cross — humility, patience , obedience ,
and charity. On this great festival let us carefully consider what it
is that is commended to us. It is a resurrection, a passover, a trans-
migration. For Christ, my brethren, did not to-day fall again but
rose again: He did not return, He passed over: He transmigrated —
did not go back . The very feast that we are celebrating is called the

Passover, not the “ the returning ; ” and Galilee, where He who rose
promises to show Himself to us, does not speak of going back but of
transmigration. . . . We have lately given up ourselves to mourning,
to penitence, and prayer — to heaviness and fasting. If we have be-
wailed our negligences, why should we now return to them ? Shall
we as before be again found inquisitive, as fond of talking as before,
slothful and negligent as before, vain, suspicious, backbiters, wrathful,
and again involved in all the other vices which we but lately were
grieving overt I have washed my feet: how shall I again defile
them ? Alas ! the resurrection of the Saviour is made the time for
sinning, the place in which to fall. Revellings and drunkenness
return, chambering and wantonness are sought after, as though it was
for this that Christ rose, and not for our justification. This is not a
passing over, but a going back. For this cause, as the Apostle says,
many are weak and sickly and many sleep. Therefore is it that in
different places are there so many deaths, specially now.” S. Anselm,
on i Cor. xi. 30, makes the same observation, viz., that at Easter
diseases walk abroad and many die, because of so many making an
unworthy communion, and either not making proper atonement for
their sins, or else going back to them.

Digitized by

Google

100 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. V.

Ver. 8 . — Therefore let us keep the feast The Latin has, “ Let us
banquet,” because feasts were wont to be celebrated with solemn
banquets in token of rejoicing.

The feast here is either the feast of the Passover or of unleavened
bread. And notice that, according to Exod. xii., the evening of the
fourteenth day of the month, or of the Passover, was not, strictly
speaking, the feast, but the following morning was, which was called
the feast of the first day of unleavened bread, and lasted for seven
days, during which nothing but unleavened bread was allowed to be
eaten ; and before those days, viz., on the fourteenth day of the first
month Nisan, instead of the Paschal lamb that had been killed, they
killed other Paschal victims, viz., burnt-offerings and peace-offerings.
Cf. Num. xxviii. 19. The meaning, therefore, is this: Christ, having
been sacrificed for us as our Passover, has redeemed us, and has
begun for us the feast of unleavened bread. Therefore, after this
Passover, after the death and redemption of Christ, let us keep this
spiritual feast of unleavened bread, that we may be unleavened and
pure, and may consequently feed on unleavened things, may
enjoy purity of life for the seven days of our life. As all our time
is measured by seven revolving days, seven is a symbol of complete-
ness, and therefore the seven days mentioned here denote the whole
of life here below. Through that life we are to keep up the memo-
rial of Christ’s redemption, of our Paschal Lamb, by purity of life that
befits Christians, and by sacrifices and praises.

But since the evening of the Passover could also be joined with
the following morning, as the Jews reckoned their feasts from even-
ing to evening, hence this evening may also be called a feast, or at
all events a festive sacrifice and banquet of a lamb. Hence the
Latin version is, “ Let us banquet.” Hence a second meaning can
be gathered, which is this : “ Let us keep a perennial Passover: let the
Paschal feast be to us a continuous feast throughout the day of life,
by our daily feeding on Christ, our Paschal Lamb, and His good
gifts; and let us festively banquet on Him spiritually, by faith, hope,
and charity, or even really in the Blessed Sacrament, and that with
the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” Cf. Chrysostom and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CHRISTIAN FEAST

IOI

Anselm. For though the Paschal lamb, as it was slain, was a figure
of Christ slain on the Cross, yet as far as it was eaten with un-
leavened bread it was rather a figure of the Unbloody Sacrifice of
the Eucharist In the same way the Passover here is understood
of Christ sacrificed and eaten in the Eucharist by S. Cyprian (, Semt,
de Cana Dom.\ by Nazianzen ( Orat \ de Pascha), by Chrysostom
(Serm, de Prod, Juda), by Ambrose (In Luc, L), by Jerome and
Origen (in S. Matt. xxvi.). Hence S. Andrew the Apostle said to
King iEgeas : “ I daily sacrifice an immaculate Lamb, which
remains whole and living, even when all the people have eaten of
It.” Hence, too, it is that the Church reads this passage of the
Apostle’s for the Epistle at Easter, when she bids all to communi-
cate and to feed on this Paschal Lamb, although in the Primitive
Church the faithful ate of it daily, as the Apostle here exhorts.

Chrysostom gives us a moral meaning here when he says that we
should banquet, not because it is Easter or Pentecost, but because
all time is given to the Christian for so banqueting, because of the
excellency of the gifts conferred. He says : “ What good thing
is there that the Son of God has not given you by being bom and
slain for you ? He has set you free and called you into His king-
dom. Why then do you not banquet always ? ” Hence S. Sylvester
said that all days were festal days, because the Christian ought to
feast every day, and be at leisure for God, and keep the spiritual
feast So too S. Clement of Alexandria (Strom, lib. 7) says: “The
whole life of the righteous is one solemn and holy feast day.”

Neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, Vatablus trans-
lates wickedness, craftiness , and others render it depravity ; for he
is wicked who does evil mediately, and with guile and fraud. The
Latins of old by malice and wickedness signified all the vices and
crimes of men. Hence the saying of Publius Africanus (apud
Gell, lib. vil c. n) that all the evil and disgraceful and heinous
things that men do are briefly comprehended in two words, malice
and wickedness.

But with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, A Hebraism.
Let us banquet, not on literal unleavened bread, but on spiritual,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

102 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. V.

i.e., on sincerity (or purity) and truth — not merely truth of the
mind or of the mouth, but the truth of life, the Christian righteous-
ness ; in other words, any duty of virtue that Christians are bound
to, especially simplicity, faithfulness, and truth. Sincerity is here
opposed to malice, and truth to wickedness.

Ver. 9. — I wrote unto you. In ver. 2 of this chapter. So Theo-
doret and Chrysostom. But S. Thomas, Lyranus, Cajetan think that
S. Paul wrote this in another former epistle which has perished.

Not to company with fornicators . . . for then must ye needs go out
of the world. When I bade you have no fellowship with fornicators
I did not mean that you were to avoid fornicating pagans, for then
you would have to go out of the world, for the whole world is full
of pagans, who are either fornicators, or covetous, or idolaters ; but
if any one who is a brother, says S. Ambrose, if any one who is
a Christian, is publicly spoken ill of as a fornicator, then avoid him.

Ver. 1 1. — If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator. This
admits of being rendered, “ If any man that is a brother be called
a fornicator.” Hence S. Augustine ( contra Parrnen, lib. iii. c. 2)
says : “ Is called? i.e., is judged and declared guilty of fornication.

Or covetous , . . or an extortioner. The first word here denotes
one who stealthily seizes others' goods by fraud, the second one
who seizes them by open violence. But the miser who clings to
his money too tenaciously will not be excluded from heaven, unless
he refuse to give alms to the poor in their great necessity : much
less is he to be excluded from the society of the faithful. But the
Apostle orders this in this verse. Therefore " covetous,” as I said,
must mean a thief or robber. Cf. 2 Cor. vii. 2 and xii. 18.

Ver. 1 2. — For what have I to do to judge them that are without ?
To judge is here and elsewhere the same as to condemn and punish
fornicators, e.g ., by excommunicating them, which is done in order
to warn others who are pure and innocent not to mingle with them.
When S. Paul says that they were not to mingle with fornicators,
he at the same time judges indirectly the fornicators, by ordering
them to be avoided and shunned as guilty and dangerous. He con-
demns not those outside the Church, because as pagans they were

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SUBJECT MATTER OF DISCIPLINE IO3

beyond his jurisdiction, but only the faithful, who were subject to
his pastoral care.

It may be said that if we cannot judge them that are without,
the Church cannot judge and punish heretics and schismatics, for
they are without, i.e . 9 outside the Church. I answer that they are
without the Church in the sense of being deprived of all her benefits,
but within so far as jurisdiction is concerned. The very fact that
they still retain the character of baptism makes them subject and
bound to the Church. Hence they are bound to observe the
fasts and feasts and other laws of the Church ; and they are in the
Church as slaves in a family, or as criminals imprisoned in a city.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER VI

I The Corinthians must not vex their brethren , in going to law with them:
6 especially under infidels . 9 7 he unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom

of God, 15 Our bodies are the metdbers of Christy 19 and temples of the itoly
Ghost. r6, 17 They must not therefore be defiled.

D ARE any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the
unjust, and not before the saints ?

2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world ? and if the world shall
be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters ?

3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels ? how much more things that per-
tain to this life ?

4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge
who are least esteemed in the church.

5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you ?
no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren ?

6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.

7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one
with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong ? why do ye not rather suffer
yourselves to be defrauded ?

8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God ?
Be not deceived : neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate,
nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners,
shall inherit the kingdom of God.

1 1 And such were some of you : but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but
ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient : all things
arc lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats : but God shall destroy both
it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord ; and the
Lord for the body.

14 And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his
own power.

15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then
take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an iiarlot ? God
forbid.

16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for
two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Z04

Digitized by v^,ooQle

LITIGIOUSNESS CONDEMNED

I°5

18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body ; but he
that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which
is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

20 For ye are bought with a price : therefore glorify God in^
in your spirit, which are God’s.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTE

L The Apostle passes on to the subject of lawsuits and' 1
proves the Corinthians for instituting proceedings
judges, and he declares those proceedings to be thereupon unjust
and unfair.

ii. Then (ver. 9) he declares that the unrighteous, of whom he names several

kinds, shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

iii. He passes on (ver. 13) to fornication, and condemns it on many grounds,

which I will collect at the end of the chapter.

Ver. 1. — Dare any of you . ... go to law f Literally, he judged '
t.e., contend in judgment. Cf. 1 Sam. xii. 7 ; Ezek. xx. 35; and Jer.
ii. 35. The Apostle is not censuring those who were dragged before
-the heathen tribunals, but those who dragged their brethren before
them, or who appeared before them by the consent of both parties.

Before the unjust The saints here is a name for the faithful, and
the unjust \ therefore, are Gentile unbelievers. So Chrysostom, Theo-
phylact, Anselm. The heathen are. so called as lacking the faith
by which the just man lives, and as being therefore unjust, and
as often committing injustice strictly so called. In other words,
since these unjust men are the judges, justice is not to be looked for
from them. As they pervert the faith, so do they justice.

Ver. 2. — If the world shall be judged by you , are ye unworthy to
judge the smallest matters t If the saints are to judge the whole
world how much more ought they to be able to act as arbiters in
composing their own small differences ?

Ver. 3. — Know ye not that we shall judge angels ? Some think
that angels here means priests, and they refer to Malachi ii. 7, u For
he is the angel of the Lord of hosts,” spoken of the priest But
this is foreign to the mind of S. Paul, and therefore the Fathers
unanimously take it literally.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

106 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

Observe that, as Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ambrose, and Anselm
say, it is the day of general judgment that is here spoken of.

Hence it follows (i.) that at that day not only men but angels,
both good and bad, are to be judged. Chrysostom, Theophylact,
Theodoret, Anselm understand this passage to refer to evil angels ;
for there is one Church of angels and men, and one Head and
Judge, even Christ Such a judgment tends to display publicly the
Divine righteousness, and the honour due to the angels.

It follows (2.) that this judgment is not such an one as is spoken
of in S. Matt xii. 41, where it is said that the Queen of the South
and the Ninevites should rise up in the judgment and condemn
that generation of Jews, but judgment in the proper sense of the
word, inasmuch as it is set side by side with that by which the
Corinthians judged their worldly matters. S. Paul says then that
Christ and the Saints, by their power and authority, shall judge the
angels as well as men : the good by a judgment of approbation,
of praise and glory, and the evil by a judgment of condemnation
and reprobation. They shall be judges because, when they were
frail men in the body, they devoted themselves to the worship of
God and perfect purity. The others shall be judged because they
refused to do God’s will, though they were incorporeal and pure
spirits. So Theophylact and Theodoret. Again, because the Saints
were victorious over the devil in this life, they for their reward shall,
before the whole world, pass judgment on his malice, pride, and
foolishness, and shall exult over him as conquered, mean, and con-
temptible, cast away by God, and condemned to everlasting punish-
ment So Christ is said to do in Col. ii. 1 5. And this will be to
the exquisite pride of the devils a most bitter punishment, as Francis
Suarez says beautifully (pt. iii. qu. 69, disp. 57, sect 8). Add to
this that the Apostles and Apostolic men, who left all and followed
Christ most closely, will be nearest to the Judge, as the leaders of
His kingdom and assessors of their King. And so their sentence
will be Christ’s ; and as Cardinals are associated with the Pope, so
they with Christ shall judge all others.

How much more things that pertain to this life? We are com-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CHRISTIAN AS JUDGE

107

petent and worthy to judge things that belong to man’s ordinary
life, if only the office of judging is intrusted to us by the litigating
parties, or if we are appointed to it by the Church or by the State.
For if we are able to judge angels* why not matters of this world ?
For angels as far surpass worldly things as heaven is higher than
earth.

Ver. 4. — Set them to judge who are least esteemed \ rather than the
heathen.

Ver. 5. — Is it so that there is not a wise man among you ? no, not
one that shall be able to judge between his brethren ? This is severe
irony, and a tacit reproof and condemnation. Sedulius and Gregory
(Mor. lib. xix. c. 21) take it a little differently, as if said seriously,
as though he meant : Let those who are of lesser merit in the
Church, and who have no great gifts of power, judge in matters of
worldly business, that so those who cannot do great things may be
the means of supplying lesser benefits.

This judging of secular causes was afterwards intrusted amongst
Christians to the presbyters and Bishops, as appears from Clement
(Constit. lib. i. c. 49-51, and Ep . L to James the Lord’s brother).
He says: “If brethren have any dispute let them not take it for
decision before secular magistrates, but, whatever it is, let it be
ended by the presbyters of the Church, and let their decision be
implicitly obeyed.” “ This too was afterwards decreed in the civil
law by the Emperor Theodosius, and confirmed by Charlemagne
(xl qu. 1, Can. Quicunque and Can. Volumus), who gave per-
mission to any one, whether plaintiff or defendant, to appeal from
the secular tribunal to the Ecclesiastical court. Hence it was
that Gregory Thaumaturgus, Bishop of Neo-Caesarea, discharged
among his faithful the office of judge, as is testified by Gregory
of Nyssa in the life that he wrote of him ; so did S. Ambrose, as
appears from Offic. lib. ii. c. 29, where he says that he had brought
to nought the unjust judgments of the Emperors ; so did S. Augus-
tine (de Opere Monach. c. 26); Synesius ( Epp . 57 and 58). But
as the number of Christians and lawsuits increased, the Bishops
transferred this duty to secular judges, who were, however, Christians

Digitized by v^,ooQle

108 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

This they did, following the teaching and appointment of S. Peter,
who thus writes to Clement, and in him to all Bishops, in the
letter just cited: “Christ does not wish you to be a judge or
decider of worldly affairs, lest being engrossed with the things that
are seen you have no leisure for the word of God, or for severing
the good from the bad according to the rule of truth.”

It may be asked, Why then does not S. Paul intrust this office
of judge to the Bishop ? Ambrose replies, Because there was no
such officer at Corinth as yet : “ He had not yet been appointed
to rule their Church.” The Corinthians had but recently been
converted by S. Paul, and were yet but few in number.

Ver. 7. — Now, therefore, there is utterly a fault among you. Fault
Theophylact renders condemnation and shame. It is simpler to take
it as a defect or shortcoming, as when a man is overcome by
another his strength and courage are thereby diminished. Imperfec-
tion, meanness, and feebleness of mind are among you, because you
are overcome by anger, avarice, and strife, and can bear nothing. It
is the mark of a great mind to be raised high above all these things,
to look down upon them as beneath its notice, and to care nothing
for injuries. It is littleness of mind and love of gain which make
you go to law before heathen tribunals, to the scandal of believers
and unbelievers, who are thus led to blaspheme the faith of Christ

Why do ye not rather take wrong t Or suffer loss, as beseems
those that are but newly Christians, who are few in number, and in
the first fervour of their profession of peace and perfection.

This passage, however, does not favour the Anabaptists, who hold
that it means that all judicial power should be taken from the
magistrates. For (1.) as Chrysostom says, the Apostle is not con-
demning the existence of law-courts, but the impatience of the
litigants. (2.) He censures them for inflicting injury on their fellow-
Christians (ver. 8); (3.) for going for judgment on these matters
before the unbelievers and the unjust; (4.) for oppressing the
poor among them wrongfully; (5.) for so scandalously disturbing
brotherly peace, which is the bond of charity, and thus injuring the
faith itself. Cajetan adds that one or other of the parties must

Digitized by v^,ooQle

LITIGIOUSNESS

109

always be in the wrong, because one or other favours an unjust
cause, unless he can be excused through ignorance. Wherefore S.
Augustine {Enchirid. c. 78) says that even lawsuits that are just
can hardly be entered into without sin, at all events venial sin,
because they generally proceed from a too great love of worldly
things, and can scarcely be free from the danger of hatred, ill-will,
and injurious dealing. There is added to this loss of time, of peace,
and internal tranquillity, which cannot be compensated for except by
a still greater good, and therefore even suits that have justice on
their side are not undertaken without sin. Hence Christ, in S.
Matt v. 40, enjoins : “ If any man will sue thee at the law, and
take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.” A greater good
is the necessity of one's sel£ of the public, of one's family, godliness,
or the obligations of justice, as when you determine to protect or
recover the goods of a monastery, or of the poor, by the public law-
courts. So Paul appealed to Caesar's judgment-seat (Acts xxv. 11).
In fine, the Apostle is not here blaming judging on the part of the
judge, but only on the part of the suitors. And so, even if it were
sin to go to law, it would not be sin to pass judgment ; for judg-
ments put an end to suits, which is altogether a good thing. S.
Clement of Rome supports in this S. Paul, his master and contem-
porary {Comfit. A post. lib. ii. c. 45), in the words: It is the
beautiful boast of a Christian that he goes to law with no one \ But
if by the doing of others, or by any temptation, it come to pass that he
is entangled in a lawsuit, he does all he can to put an end to it,
although he have thereby to suffer loss, and to prevent himself from
having to appear before the heathen's judgment- seat. Nay, do not
suffer secular magistrates to decide in your causes, for by them the
devil endeavours to bring the servants of God into reproach, by
making it appear that you have no wise man to do justice between
you , or to put an end to controversy .”

Vers. 9, 10. — Neither fornicators nor adulterers, &c. . . . shall in-
herit the kingdom of God. Hence it appears that not only adultery
but also fornication, by which an unmarried man sins with an un-
married woman, is against the law of Christ and of nature. Rabbi

Digitized by v^,ooQle

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

MQses ^gypt. erred shamefully in this respect ( More , lib. iii. c.
50) when he excused the intercourse of Judah with Tamar, related in
Gen. xxxviiL, on the ground that before the law of Moses whoredom
was allowable. Our politicians err still more shamefully who, while
allowing that fornication is forbidden by the law of Christ, yet
deny that it was forbidden by the law of Moses. For Moses includes
it, as do the Rabbins always, in Exod. xx., under the sixth com-
mandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” under which not
only adultery, but also incest, sodomy, fornication, and all kinds
of sexual intercourse and lust outside the limits of matrimony are
forbidden. So Tobias (iv. 13) says: “Keep thyself, my son, from
all fornication.”

So the Apostle here reckons fornication with adultery, idolatry,
and other sins which are against the law of nature and of the Deca-
logue, and naturally shut out men from the kingdom of heaven.
For fornication is at variance with the first creation of man, and
with the institution of matrimony, by which the God of nature and
the Lord of all things has tied the use of those members which
serve for generation to matrimony ; and outside that He has taken
away all permisson to use them. It is opposed also to conjugal
fidelity, and to the good of the offspring, who cannot be properly
brought up in fornication, but only in matrimony. Hence Deut.
xxii. 21 orders a maiden to be stoned who before marriage has com-
mitted fornication in her father’s house. And the Wise Man says
(Ecclus. xix. 3): “ He who joins himself to fornication shall be vile.”

Lastly, to pass over other instances, 24,000 of the Israelites were
killed for committing fornication with the daughters of Moab.

Effeminate, Those guilty of self-pollution.

Covetous, Those who by fraud, unfair contracts, and legal
quibbles get possession of the goods of others. They are distinct
from thieves and robbers. Cf. note to ver. 10.

Drunkards, The Greek word here stands both for one that is
drunk and one that is given to drink. Here it denotes rather the
act than the habit, as the other words, thieves, revilers, adulterers,
do; for one of such acts excludes from the kingdom of heaven.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THINGS LAWFUL AND EXPEDIENT

III

Cf. Gal. v. 21. A single act of drunkenness, if it is perfected, is
deadly sin, because it deprives a man of the use of his reason, and
makes him like a beast, and exposes him to danger of broils, lust,
and many other sins. S. Thomas says, however : “ Drunkenness is
not a mortal sin if a man is ignorant of the strength of the wine
or the weakness of his head.” This excuse, however, is rendered
invalid by frequent experience; therefore the Apostle says signi-
ficantly, “habitual drunkard,” not merely “drunkard.” But the
former explanation is the sounder.

Ver. ii. — But ye are washed . . . by the Spirit of our God, Ye
were justified in baptism by the Holy Spirit. So Chrysostom,
Theophylact, CEcumenius. S. Cyprian gives a beautiful example
of this washing and change of character, produced in his own case
by being baptized into Christianity, in Ep. 2, to Donatus, in which
he candidly confesses what sort of man he was before his baptism,
what a sudden change passed over him through the grace of
baptism, and what benefits Christianity conferred upon him, which,
as he says, “ is the death of vices, the life of virtues.” Nazianzen
( Orat . Funebr . in Laudem S. Cypr .) says the same, and relates his
wonderful conversion, and the change of heart and life which
baptism wrought in him.

Ver. 12. — All things are lawful unto me , but all things are not
expedient All things, say Theodoret and (Ecumenius, are through
tree- will lawful unto me, are in my power, e.g., to commit fornica-
tion, to rob, to be drunken, and all the other sins mentioned above.
But they are not expedient for the salvation of my soul, inasmuch
as they are sins.

But this rendering is rightly condemned by Ambrose, who says :
“How can that be lawful which is forbidden? for surely if all things
are lawful there can be nothing unlawful” In other words he says
that that is said to be lawful which no law forbids. The word lawful
does not apply to that which it is in the power of the will to do or
leave undone. The meaning, therefore, of this passage is, all indif-
ferent things, all not forbidden by any law, are lawful to me. So
Chrysostom, who with Theophylact refers these words to the next verse.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

112 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

Ver. 13. — Meats for the belly and the belly for meats \ 1. Al-

though it is lawful for me to eat of every kind of food, yet I will
not allow desire for any food to get the mastery over me, and make
me a slave to my belly.

a. Ambrose and S. Thomas understand these words to refer to
his personal expenses, and to mean — Though it is lawful for me as
a preacher of the Gospel to receive from you means of support, yet
I will not receive it, lest I become chargeable to any one and lose
my liberty. The Apostle after his manner joins together various dis-
connected matters, which he knew would be intelligible in other
ways to t{iose to whom he was writing.

3. The best rendering is to refer these words, with Anseltn and
S. Thomas, to what had been said above about judgments : I have
said these things against going to law, not because it is unlawful in
itself for a man to seek to regain his own at law, but because I am
unwilling for you to be brought under the power of any one, whether
he be judge, advocate, or procurator, especially when they are of
the unbelievers.

S. Bernard (de Constd, lib. iii.) says, moralising: “ The spiritual
man will, before undertaking any work, ask himself three questions, Is
it lawful ? Is it becoming l Is it expedient l For although, as is well
known in the Christian philosophy, nothing is becoming save what is
lawful, and nothing is expedient save what is both lawful and
becoming, nevertheless it does not follow that all that is lawful is
necessarily also becoming or expedient .”

Why, says S. Paul, do you enter on lawsuits for the sake of
worldly good, which for the most part serves only for the belly and
its meats ? For food is but a perishing and mean thing, made but
to be cast into the belly. The belly too is the lowest part of man,
made only to cook, digest, cast forth, and corrupt the food, and is a
vessel containing all that is disgusting. Both food and belly shall
be destroyed, for both shall be food for worms; and though the
belly shall rise again, yet it will no longer take in food. Secondly,
it should be observed that the Apostle here purposely introduces
gluttony, because it is the mother of lust, which he then proceeds

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE LAW OF PURITY

113

to condemn. So Theophylact Hence in the passage bearing the
name of S. Athanasius (qu. 133 ad Antioch .), the belly here is
understood to mean gluttony and drunkenness. The belly has its
desire to drunkenness, and drunkenness to it ; but he who is thus
given up to serve his belly cannot serve God, but is the slave of
his belly, and therefore shall be destroyed of God. This passage
is plainly not the writing of S. Athanasius, for earlier (qu. 23)
Athanasius himself is quoted, and differed from ; moreover, Epipha-
nius and Gregory of Nyssa are quoted, who lived after Athanasius.

But God shall destroy both it and them. In death and the re-
surrection, in such a way that the belly will no longer be for meats,
nor will there be meats to fill the belly.

Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord
for the body . It was not meant, or given us, for such an end, but
that with chaste body we should serve the Lord, and follow Him,
our Head, with pure and holy lives. So Anselm. So also is Christ
given to our body to be its head and crown. Or the Lord is for
the body in another sense, according to Ambrose and Anselm, viz.,
that He is the reward for the body that is chaste and pure, and He
will give it incorruption and immortality. The first meaning is the
simpler, for S. Paul proceeds to speak of the resurrection.

Ver. 14. — And God . . . will also raise up us by His own power ,
As He raised up Christ when crucified and dead, so too if -with
Christ we die to lust and gluttony, and crucify them, will He raise
up us.

Ver. 15 — Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ ?
For ye yourselves, and consequently your body and soul, are mem-
bers of the Church of Christ. S. Augustine (Serm, 18. in hoec Verb,)
says beautifully : “ The life of the body is the soul, the life of the soul is
God, The Spirit of God dwells in the soul, and through the soul in
the body, so that our bodies also are a temple of the Holy Spirit, whom
we have from God”

Shall I then . . . make them the members of an harlot l God
forbid. Take here is not to pluck off and separate from Christ, for

a fornicator remains a member of Christ and His Church so long

VOL. I. H

Digitized by v^,ooQle

1 14 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VL

as he retains the true faith. But it means, as S. Thomas says, un-
justly to withdraw these members, that were given for generation,
from the obedient service of Christ, whose they are. For whoever
of the faithful commits fornication filches as it were his body and
his organs of generation, which body is a member of Christ, from
their lawful owner, and gives them to a harlot. He takes, therefore
from Christ, not jurisdiction over his body, but the use of it.

Ver. 16. — Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one
body l One body by a union and blending of the two bodies.
Just as merchants in partnership have but one capital, because it
is common to both, so those who join in committing fornication
have one body, because their bodies are common to both, as
Cajetan says. So two are one flesh : that is, out of two there is
made but one human being, and that not spiritual, but carnal —
wholly fleshly.

For two , saith He , shall be one flesh. S. Paul is here quoting
from Gen. ii. 24, where the words are applied to those married.
But he refers them truly enough to fornicators, because the external
acts, whether of them or of those married, do not differ in kind,
though they differ morally by the whole sky, for the acts of the
fonner are lustful and vicious, but those of the latter are acts of
temperance, righteousness, and virtue, as S. Thomas says.

1. Observe that it is said of the married that they too shall be
one flesh (1.) by carnal copulation, as the Apostle here takes it; (2.)
by synecdoche, they shall be one individual, one person: for the
man and the woman civilly are, and are reckoned as one ; (3.) be-
cause in wedlock each is the master of the other’s body, and so the
flesh of one is the flesh of the other (cf. 1 Cor. vii. 3) ; (4.) in the
effect produced, for they produce one flesh, that is one offspring.

2. Observe again that Scripture employs this phrase in order to
show that of all human relationships the bond of matrimony is the
closest and the most inviolable. Hence it was that God made Eve
out of the rib of Adam, to show that the man and the woman are
not so much two as one, and ought to be one in heart and will,
and therefore, if need be, each for the sake of the other ought to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE

115

leave father and mother, as is said in Gen. ii. 24. The Apostle
quotes this passage to show the fornicator how grievously he lowers
and disgraces himself, inasmuch as he so closely joins himself to
some abandoned harlot as to become one with her, and as it were
he transforms himself into her and himself becomes a harlot.

Ver. 17. — But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit . Not
one essentially, as Ruisbrochius (de Aita Contempt .) says that
Almaric and certain fanatic 44 illuminati ” thought, but one in the
way of accidents : one in charity, in the consent of the will, in grace
and glory, all which make man like God, so that he is as it were
one and the same spirit with God. So Ambrose, Anselm, (Ecumenius.
From this passage S. Basil (de Vera Virgin.) shows that the chaste
and holy soul is the spouse of God, and is changed into the ex-
cellence of the Divine image, so as to become one spirit with God,
and from this union with God drinks in all possible purity, virtue,
incorruption, peace, and inward calm. u Wherefore ,” he says, “the
soul which is joined to Christ is, as it were, the bride of the Wisdom or
the Word of God ; is necessarily wise and prudent, so that every mark
of the yoke of brutish folly having been removed by meditation on Divine
things, she wears the beauteous ornament of the Wisdom to which
she has been joined, until she so thoroughly joins to herself the Eternal
Wisdom , so becomes one with It, that of corruptible she is made in-
corruptible, of ignorant most prudent and wise , like the Word, to whose
side she has closely kept, and in short, of mortal man is made immortal
God ; and so He to whom she has been united is made manifest to all ”

S. Bernard ( Serm 7 in Cantic.) beautifully describes this betrothal
of God with the soul that clings to Him with pure and holy love,
and the communication of all good things that flows from it. He
says : 44 The soul which loves God is called His bride ; for the two
names, bride and bridegroom, denote the closest affections of the heart ;
for to them all things are in common : they have one purse, one home,
one table, one bed, one flesh. Therefore shall a man leave father and
mother, &*c., and they twain shall be one flesh. . . . She that loves is
called a bride ; but one that loves seeks for kisses — not for liberty, or
wages, or a settlement of money, but for kisses after the manner of a

Digitized by v^,ooQle

Il6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

most chaste bride , whose every breath whispers of her love in all its
purity , and who is wholly unable to conceal the fire that is burning
her . * Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth] she says. It is

as though she were to say , 4 What have I in heaven , and what do I
wish for on earth apart from you ? 9 Surely this , her love , is chaste ,
since she seeks to have Him that she loves , and nothing else besides Him.
It is a holy love , because it is not in the lust of the fleshy but in the
purity of the spirit. It is a burning love , because she is so drunken
with her own love that she thinks not of His majesty. Yet He is
One that looks at the earth and it trembles , He toucheth the mountains
and they smoke , and she seeks to be kissed by Him. Is she drunk ?
Surely so, because she had perchance come forth from the wine-cellar.
How great is love’s power l how great is the confidence of the spirit
of liberty l Perfect love casteth out fear. She does not say , 4 Let
this or that bridegroom , or friend or king, kiss me] but definitely,

4 Let Him kiss me 9 Just so Mary Magdalene, when she found not her
Lord in the tomb, and believed Him to have been taken away, said of
Him, 4 If thou have borne Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid
Him, and I will take Him away . 9 Who is the 4 Him 9 f She does
not reveal it, because she supposes that what is never for a moment
absent from her heart must be obvious to all. So too the bride says,

4 Let him kiss me] i.e., him who is never absent from my heart ; for
being on fire with love she thinks that the name of him she loves
is well known to all” More on this betrothal and union to God
of the soul that clings to Him will be found in the notes to
2 Cor. xi. 2.

Again we find S. Bernard, or the author of the treatise, 44 On
the Solitary I ,ife,” saying towards the end : 44 The perfection of the
will that is moving towards God is to be found in the unity with God
of the spirit of the man whose affections are set on things above .
When he now no longer merely wills what God wills, but has so far
advanced in love that he cannot will save what God wills, the union
is complete. For to will what God wills is to be like God; not to be
able to will save what God wills is to be what God is, with whom
Will and Being are the same. Hence it is well said that then we

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SPIRITUAL MARRIAGE

II 7

shall see Him as He is , when we shall be so like Him that we shall
be what He is. For to those to whom has been given the power
of becoming the sons of God \ there has been also given the power of
becoming, not indeed God , but what God is.

S. Bernard goes on to point out a triple similitude that men have
to God, and then he adds : “ This likeness of man to God is called
a unity of spirit, not merely because it is the Holy Spirit that effects
it, or because He affects marls spirit towards it, but because it is itself
the Holy Spirit — God who is love. Since He is the bond of love
between the Father and the Son, He is unity, and sweetness , and good,
and kisses , and embraces, and whatever can be common to Both in that
supreme unity of Truth and truth of Unity ; and similarly He makes
man to become to God after mails capacity all that by substantial
unity the Father is through Him to the Son and the Son to the
Father. The blessed consciousness of man has found in some way a
means by which it embraces the Father and the Son : in an ineffable
and inconceivable manner man merits to become of God, though not
God. God, however, is what He is by His own Nature ; man becomes
what he does by grace.”

Ver. 1 8 . — Flee fornication. Because, as Anselm, Cassian, and
the Fathers generally teach, other vices are conquered by re-
sistance, lust alone by flight, viz., by fleeing from women, from the
objects and occasions of lust, by turning aside the eyes and the
mind to see and think of other things. For if you oppose a temp-
tation to some lewdness, or fight against some impure thought,
you only excite the imagination by thinking of such things, and
then inflame still more the innate lust of the flesh, that is naturally
disposed to such acts as fornication.

Every sin that a man doeth is without the body. Does not stain
or pollute the body.

It may be said that if a man kills or mutilates or castrates him-
self he sins against his body, and therefore it is not a fact that every
sin distinct from fornication is without the body.

I reply that every sin, i.e., every kind of sins which men commonly
and ordinarily commit is without the body. For there are seven

Digitized by v^,ooQle

Il8 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

capital sins, which theologians, following S. Paul, divide into spiritual
and bodily or camaL Those that are carnal are two — gluttony and
lust ; the spiritual are five — pride, covetousness, anger, envy, sloth.
Of these anger and envy tend directly of themselves towards murder
of one’s neighbour, but not except by accident towards murder of
one’s self, and that in few and extraordinary cases. The angry man,
therefore, does not ordinarily and necessarily sin against his body,
but against that of another, by assaulting him or killing him. The
Apostle’s meaning then is, that all the sins in general which men
ordinarily and commonly commit are without the body. " Every
sin ” therefore does not include mutilation or suicide, which happen
rarely, and as it were accidentally; nor does it include gluttony
as I will show directly.

But he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body .
S. Jerome {Ep. ad Amand. tom. iii.) gives two explanations of this
passage, of which the first is — the fornicator sins against his wife,
who is his own body ; the second is — he plants in his body the seeds
of sexual passion, which, even after his sin, remain, when he wishes
to repent, to spring up into active life. S. Jerome says that “ other
sins are without , and after being committed are repented of and
though profit urge to them yet conscience rebukes. Lust alone , even in
the hour of repentance , suffers under the whips and stings of the past \
and under organic irritation , and under incentives to sin , so that
material for sin is supplied again by thoughts of the very things which
we long to see corrected. n S. Jerome confesses (Ep. 22 ad Eustoch.)
that he knew this from his own experience. S. Mary of Egypt
found the same true in her own case, who endured under penance
these whips and stings for as many years as she had formerly given
to sexual passion, viz., seventeen, as Sophronius, Patriarch of Jeru-
salem, relates in her life.

(Ecumenius has ten other explanations of this passage, as has
also Isidorus Pelusiota {lib. iv. Ep. 129). But the true and genuine
sense is : Whoever commits fornication does injury to his own body,
1. because he pollutes and disgraces his body, as Gregory of Nyssa
says in his oration on these words.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE EVIL OF FORNICATION

119

2. Because by fornication he weakens and exhausts his body,
and often destroys it, by contracting venereal disease. So S.
Athanasius, quoted by CEcuraenius. In both these ways the glutton
and drunkard sin against their body, because the first disgraces it
by subjecting it to unhealthy humours, to vomiting, and other dis-
gusting things, while the latter weakens, injures, and finally ruins
its natural heat and strength. Hence under the name of fornication,
here gluttony and drunkenness, as being akin to it, or rather its
mother, may be understood. It was for this reason that the Apostle,
in ver. 13, spoke of gluttony. For these two sins, gluttony and lust,
are vices peculiar to the body, and are thence called sins of the
flesh : other sins belong to the spirit alone, as I have just said.

3. The fornicator does injury to his own body, inasmuch as he
alone brings his body, which was created free, pure, and noble,
under the jurisdiction, service, and power of the most degraded
harlot, so that he becomes as one thing with her. In the same way
that, if any one were to bind his own body, that was noble, healthy,
and beautiful, to the body of some loathsome leper, he would be said
to do his body a great wrong, so does he who unites to a common,
base, and infamous harlot his body, that was created by God pure,
noble* and free, and redeemed and washed by the blood of Christ,
do to it grievous injury. In all these verses the Apostle lays stress
upon this wrong.

4. The fornicator does injury to his body, because he excites
in it a foul and shameful lust, which so absorbs the mind that in
carrying it out into action the man can think of nothing else. He
makes his body, therefore, the slave of his lust, in such a way that
he is wholly ruled by it Neither gluttony nor any other sin in the
body excites such shameful and vehement lust as this is. Impurity
alone then holds sway over the body, and by its lust and outward
action stains, subjugates, and destroys it

Ver. 19 . — Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy
Ghost l They, therefore, who pollute their bodies by impurity are
guilty of sacrilege, for they sin against the Holy Ghost They do
Him wrong by robbing Him of the body dedicated to Him, and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

120 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VI.

transferring it to the demon of lust. Further, the bodies of the
faithful are the temple of the Spirit of Christ, because they themselves
are members of Christ, and because the faithful are one spirit with
God. (See notes to vers. 16, 17, and 2 Cor. vi. 16.) Tertullian
cleverly and beautifully says (de Cultu Femin . c. i.) that the guardian
and high-priestess of this temple is chastity. He says : “ Since we
are all the temple of God ', because endowed and consecrated with the
Holy Spirit , the guardian and high-priestess of His temple is chastity ,
who suffers nothing unclean , nothing unholy to be carried in, lest God \
who inhabits it, be offended, and leave His polluted shrine .” The faith-
ful and just is therefore a temple in which by grace dwells and is
worshipped the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given us, to work in
us all holy thoughts, affections, words, and works. Wherefore it is
altogether unseemly that His soul and body should by fornication
become the temple of Venus and Priapus : this is a grievous wrong
done to God and the Holy Spirit Hence it was that S. Seraphia,
virgin and martyr, when asked by the judge, “Where is the temple
of the Christ whom you adore, where you sacrifice ? ” replied, 4< I,
by cultivating chastity, am the temple of Christ, and to Him I offer
myself a sacrifice.” The judge retorted, “If your chastity, then,
were taken from you, you would, I suppose, cease to be a temple of
Christ?” The virgin rejoined: “If any man defile the temple of
God, him shall God destroy.” The judge then sent two young men
to violate her, but at her prayer an earthquake took place, and the
young men fell down dead : they were, however, at her prayers re-
stored to life. This is to be found in her life by Surius, under the
3rd of September.

Ver. 20— For ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in
your body . Value highly your bodies, though the devil bids for
them with a shameful and brief bodily delight Do not despise your
bodies, do not sell them for nothing — rather think them of the highest
possible worth ; for it is to the glory of God if these bodies, which
God bought at a great price, even with His own blood, become of
great importance in our eyes. Hence the well-known proud name
of a Christian is, “Bought and Redeemed,” viz., from sin and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SANCTITY OF THE BODY

121

heathenism, by the precious blood of Christ. So in olden times the
children of Christians were bought by the Turks, and became, instead
of Christians, Mahometans, and were called Mamelukes, or “the
bought;” for when the Tartars had subdued Armenia they sold
the children of the Christians. Melech-Sala, Sultan of Egypt, bought
them in great numbers, and had them trained as soldiers, and
called Mamelukes. After the death of Melech-Sala the Mamelukes
began to appoint a king for themselves, a . d . 1252, out of their own
society of apostate Christians. As they took their rise under the
Emperor Frederick II., so under Solyman, who filled the Egyptian
throne, they were exterminated, a . d . 1516. Then their reign and
existence ceased together. Glorify God in your body , by keeping
it pure in obedience to the Spirit and to God.

The Latin has, “ Glorify and carry God? but the carry is not in
the Greek. “As a horse,” says S. Thomas, “carries its lord and
rider, and moves as he wills, so does the body serve the will of God.”
The Greek also adds, and in your spirit \ which are God’s”

Observe that the Corinthians were greatly given to impurity, and
consequently to gluttony. This is evident from Suidas, who, under
the word “Cothys,” says: “Cothys is a devil worshipped by the
Corinthians as the ruler of effeminate and unclean persons.”
Herodotus says the same thing (Clio), and Strabo (lib. viii.). The
latter says: “The temple of Venus at Corinth was so wealthy that
it had more than a thousand harlots as priestesses, whom men and
women dedicated to the goddess.” Thus KopivOuxgeiv became a
common word for lasciviousness, self-indulgence, and impurity
generally. Hence it is that the Apostle takes such pains to warn
the Corinthians against their common sin of fornication; and he
does this by various reasons drawn from different sources : (1.) from
creation, (2.) from the resurrection of the body, (3.) from the shame-
fulness of impurity, and the injury it does to the body, (4.) from the
dignity of the body.

From these we may collect six arguments by which he seeks to
save them from fornication : (1.) Because our body is not our own
but the Lord’s (ver. 13) ; (2.) Because, if it is pure, it shall rise again

Digitized by v^,ooQle

122 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VL

with glory (ver. 14) ; (3.) Because our body is a member of Christ,
(ver. 15); (4.) Because the body is a pure temple of the Holy Spirit,
in order that by clinging to God in chastity it may become one
spirit with Him (ver. 17) ; (5.) Because impurity disgraces and defiles
the body (ver. 18); (6.) Because our body has been bought with
the blood of Christ, and therefore it is an unworthy thing, and an
injury to God, to Christ, and the Holy Spirit, to give it to a harlot
(ver. 20). See Chrysostom (in M or alii).

S. Bernard (Serm. 7 on Ps. xci.) moralises thus : “ Glorify , dearly
beloved \ and bear meanwhile Christ in your body , as a delightful burden ,
a pleasant weight \ a wholesome load, even though He seem sometimes
to weigh heavily, even though sometimes He use the spur and whip on
the laggard, even though sometimes He hold in the jaws with bit and
bridle, and curb us wholly for our good. Be as a beast of burden in the
patience with which you bear the load, and yet not as a beast, heedless
of the honour that its rider gives. Think wisely and sweetly both of
the nature of the load you bear, as well as of your own future benefit”
So S. Ignatius, the martyr, was called Ci God-bearer ” and “ Christ-
bearer,” and he salutes the Blessed Virgin by the same name, “ Christ-
bearer,” in his letters to her, as S. Bernard says.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER VII

2 He treateth of marriage , 4 showing it to be a remedy against fornication :
10 and that the bond thereof ought not lightly to be dissolved. 18, 20 Every
man must be content with his vocation . 25 Virginity wherefore to be embraced •

35 And for what respects we may either marry, or abstain from marrying.

AT OW concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me : It is good for a man
^ not to touch a woman.

2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let
every woman have her own husband.

3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence : and likewise also
the wife unto the husband.

4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband : and likewise
also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye
may give yourselves to fasting and prayer ; and come together again, that Satan
tempt you not for your incontinency.

6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.

7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his
proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they
abide even as I.

9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry : for it is better to marry than
to bum.

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the
wife depart from her husband :

11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her
husband : and let not the husband put away his wife.

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord : If any brother hath a wife that
believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be
pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving
wife is sanctified by the husband : else were your children unclean ; but now
are they holy.

1 5 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not
under bondage in such cases : but God hath called us to peace.

16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband ? or
how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife ?

17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every
one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches,

123

Digitized by v^,ooQle

124 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VIL

18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised.
Is any called in uncircumcision ? let him not be circumcised.

19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of
the commandments of God.

20 Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.

21 Art thou called being a servant ? care not for it : but if thou mayest be
made free, use it rather.

22 For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman,
likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.

23 Ye are bought with a price ; be not ye the servants of men.

24 Brethren, let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God.

25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord : yet I give
my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.

26 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is
good for a man so to be.

27 Art thou bound unto a wife ? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from
a wife? seek not a wife.

28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned ; and if a virgin marry, she hath
not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh : but I spare you.

29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short : it remaineth, that both they
that have wives be as though they had none ;

30 And they that weep, as though they wept not ; and they that rejoice, as
though they rejoiced not ; and they that buy, as though they possessed not ;

31 And they that use this world, as not abusing it, for the fashion of this
world passeth away.

32 But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth
for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord :

33 But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he
may please his wife.

34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried
woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and
in spirit : but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may
please her husband.

35 And this I speak for your own profit ; not that I may cast a snare upon
you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without
distraction.

36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin,
if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will,
he sinneth not : let them marry.

37 Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity,
but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will
keep his virgin, doeth well.

38 So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well ; but he that giveth her
not in marriage doeth better.

39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband
be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will ; only in the Lord.

40 But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment : and I think also
that I have the Spirit of God.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ON MATRIMONY

125

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

In this chapter he answers five questions of the Corinthians about the laws of
matrimony, and about the counsel of virginity and celibacy —

i. The first question is whether matrimony and its use are lawful for a

Christian, as being born again and sanctified. The answer is that
they are lawful, and that, moreover, when either party demands his
due, it ought to be given, and that therefore it is better to marry
than to burn.

ii. The second is (ver. 10) concerning divorce, whether it is lawful, and

S. Paul answers that it is not.

iii. The third is (ver. 12), If a believer have an unbelieving partner, can

they continue to live together ? He answers that they both can and
ought, if the unbeliever consents to live in peace with the believer.

iv. The fourth is (ver. 17) whether a man's state is to be changed be-

cause of his faith ; whether, a married person who was a slave
when a heathen becomes free when a Christian, whether a Gentile
becomes a Jew. He answers in the negative, and says that each
should remain in his station.

v. The fifth is (ver. 25) whether at all events those who are converted to

Christ as virgins ought to remain so. He replies that virginity is
not enjoined on any as a precept, but that it is on all as a counsel,
as being better than matrimony for six reasons : —

(a) Because of the present necessity, inasmuch as only a short time
is given us for obtaining, not temporal but eternal gain : she
that is a virgin is wholly intent on these things (ver. 26).

(£) Because he that is married is, as it were, bound to his wife
with the wedding-bond, but the unmarried is free and un-
constrained (ver. 27).

(f) Because the unmarried is free from the tribulation of the flesh
which attacks the married (ver. 28).

(d) Because a virgin thinks only of what is pleasing to God, but

one that is married has a heart divided between God and his
wife (ver. 32. )

(e) Because a virgin is holy in body and in soul, but the married

not in body, and often not in soul (ver. 34).

(/) Because he that is unmarried gives his virgin an opportunity
to serve God without interruption, whereas the married have
a thousand hindrances to piety and devotion (ver. 35).

Ver. 1. — Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me. In
answer to the questions you have put to me about the rights, use,
and end of matrimony and the single life, I answer that it is good for a
man not to touch a woman. Notice here from S. Anselm and Am-
brose that certain false Apostles, in order to seem more holy, taught
that marriage was to be despised, because of the words of Christ

Digitized by v^,ooQle

126 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

(S. Matt. x. 12), “There are eunuchs who have made themselves
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,” which they interpreted
as applying to all Christians, especially since the act of fornication,
which had been so severely condemned by the Apostle in the pre-
ceding chapter, is physically the same as conjugal copulation. The
Corinthians, therefore, asked S. Paul by letter whether Christians
ought to be so chaste, and ought to be so much free for prayer,
godliness, and purity as to be bound, even though married, to abstain
altogether from intercourse with their wives.

It is good for a man not to touch a woman . It is beautiful, ex-
emplary, and excellent. The Greek here is Kakbv. So Theophylact.
Good is not here the same as useful or expedient, as Erasmus turns
it, but denotes that moral and spiritual good which of itself conduces
to victory over passion, to piety, and salvation (cf. vers. 32, 34, 35).
To touch a woman or to know is with the Hebrews a modest form of
speech denoting the act of conjugal copulation.

S. Jerome (lib. i. contra Jovin.) adds that the Apostle says touch ,
“because the very touching of a woman is dangerous, and to be
avoided by every man.” These are his words : “ The apostle does
not say it is good not to have a wife , but i it is good not to touch a
woman ,’ as though there were danger in the touch, not to be escaped
from by any one who should so touch her: being one who steals away
the precious souls of men, and makes the hearts of youths to fly out of
their control. Shall any one nurse a fire in his bosom and not be
burnt t or walk upon hot coals and not suffer harm l In the same
way , therefore , that he who touches fire is burnt, so when man and
woman touch they feel its effect and perceive the difference between the
sexes. The fables of the heathen relate that Mithras and Ericthonius ,
either in stone or in the earth, were generated by the mere heat of lust.
Hence too Joseph fled from the Egyptian woman, because she wished to
touch him ; and as though he had been bitten by a mad dog and feared
lest the poison should eat its way, he cast off the cloak that she had
touched ” Let men and youths take note of these words.

Cardinal Vitriaco, a wise and learned man, relates of S. Mary
d’Oignies that she had so weakened and dried up her body by

Digitized by v^,ooQle

INCITEMENTS TO LUST

127

fastings that for several years she felt not even the first motions of
lust, and that when a certain holy man clasped her hand in pure
spiritual affection, and thus caused the motions of the flesh to arise,
she, being ignorant of this, heard a voice from heaven which said,
“ Do not touch me." She did not understand it, but told it to
another who did, and thenceforward she abstained from all such
contact

S. Gregory {Dial, lib. iv. c. 11) relates how S. Ursinus, a presbyter,
had lived in chastity separated from his wife, and when he was on
his death-bed, drawing his last breath, his wife came near and put
her ear to his mouth, to hear if he still breathed. He, still having
a few minutes to live, on perceiving this, said with as much strength
as he could summon, “ Depart from me, woman — a spark still lingers
in the embers ; do not fan it into a flame." Well sung the poet : —

“ Regulus by a glance, the Siren of Achelous with a song,

The Thessalian sage with gentle rubbing slays :

So with eyes, with hands, with song does woman bum,

And wield the three-forked light of angry Jove.”

S. Jerome rightly infers from this {lib. i. contra fovin.) that it is
an evil for a man to touch a woman. He does not say it is sinful, as
Jovinian and others falsely alleged against him, but evil. For this
touching is an act of concupiscence, and of the depraved pleasure
of the flesh ; but it is nevertheless excused by the good of wedlock,
but is wholly removed by the good of the single life.

It may be urged from Gen. ii. 18, where it is said that it is not
good for a man to be alone, that it is therefore good to touch a
woman. I answer that in Genesis God is speaking of the good of
the species, S. Paul of the individual ; God in the time when the
world was uninhabited, Paul when it is full ; God of temporal good,
Paul of the good of the eternal life of the Spirit In this it is good
for a man not to touch a woman.

Ver. 2. — Nevertheless to avoid fornication let every man have his
own wife. Lest being unmarried, and unwilling to live a chaste
life, he fall into fornication. Every man , say Melancthon and

Digitized by

Google

128 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

Bucer, must include the priest and the monk. I reply that every
man means every man that is free, not bound by vow, disease, or
old age : for such are incapable of matrimony. Laws and docu-
ments must be interpreted according to their subject-matter: they
only apply to those capable of receiving them, not to those who
are not To him then who is free, and unbound, and can fulfil
the requirements of matrimony, the apostle gives no precept, but
advice and permission, that if he fears to fall into fornication he
should marry a wife, or keep to her that he has already married,
rather than fall into any danger of committing such a sin. So the
Fathers whom I will quote at ver. 9 all agree in saying. This must
be the Apostle’s meaning, for otherwise he would contradict himself,
for throughout the whole chapter he urges the life of chastity.

Moreover, the apostle is speaking primarily to the married alone,
and not to the unmarried. To these latter he begins to speak in
ver. 8, Now I say to the unmarried and widows , where the adver-
sative now marks the change. He says too here let every man
have, not let every man marry, because he is speaking to those
who already had wives. So S. Jerome (lib. i. contra Jovin.) says, “ Let
every man that is married have his own wife,” i.e., continue to have
her, not dismiss or repudiate her, but rather use her lawfully and
chastely. The word have signifies not an inchoate but a continuous
action. So 2 Tim. i. 13: “Hold fast the form of sound words,”
where the same word is used. So in S. Luke xix. 26 : “ Unto every
one that hath (that uses his talent) shall be given ; and from him
that hath not (does not use), even that he hath shall be taken away
from him ; otherwise there cannot well be taken from a man what
he has not. That this is the true meaning is evident from what
follows in ver. 3.

Ver. 3. — Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence.
A modest paraphrase for the conjugal debt

Ver. 4. — The wife hath not power of her own body but the husband.
She has not power, that is, over those members which distinguish
woman from man, in so far as they serve for the conjugal act
Power she has not over them so as to contain at her own will or

Digitized by v^,ooQle

HUSBANDS AND WIVES

129

to have intercourse with another. That power belongs to the
husband alone, and that for himself only, not for another. Cf. S.
Augustine ( contra Julian . lib. v.). The Greek is literally, has no
right over her body, whether to contain or to hand it over to
another.

Likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body , but the
wife. Hence it is clear that, though in the government of the
family the wife should be subject and obedient to her husband,
yet in the right of exacting and returning the marriage debt she
is equal with her husband, has the same right over his body that
he has over hers, and this from the marriage contract, in which
each has given to the other the same power over the body, and
received the same power over the other’s body. The husband,
therefore, is as much bound to render his wife, as the wife her
husband, faithfulness and the marriage debt. This is taught at
length in their expositions of this passage by Chrysostom, Theo-
phylact, CEcumenius, Primasius, Anselm, and by S. Jerome (Cit. 32,
qu. 2, cap. Apostolus ), who says that husband and wife are de-
clared to be equal in rights and duties. “ When, therefore? says S.
Chrysostom \Hom. 19), “a harlot comes and tempts you, say that
your body is not your own but your wife's. Similarly , let the wife
say to any one who proposes to rob her of her chastity , * My body is
not mine but my husband's ”

• • >

Ver. 5. — Defraud ye not one the other. By denying the marriage
debt. The words and to fasting , though in tjie Greek, are wanting in
the Latin. Hence Nicholas I., in his answers to the questions of the
Bulgarians (c. 50), writes to them that, throughout the forty days of
Lent, they should not come at their wives. But this is a matter of
counsel

And come together again. From this Peter Martyr and the
Magdeburgians conclude that it is not lawful for married persons
to vow perpetual continence by mutual coreent But the answer
to this is that the Apostlje is not prescribing but permitting the mar-
riage act

Ver. 6. — But I speak this by permission and not of commandment.

vol. 1 . * 1

Digitized by v^,ooQle

130 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

1. I permit the act of copulation by way of indulgence : I do not
prescribe it. Nay, S. Augustine ( Enchirid '. c. 78) takes it : “I say
this by way of pardon.” The Greek word denotes forgiveness, and
hence S. Augustine gathers that it is a venial sin to have sexual
connection, not for the sake of children but for carnal pleasure,
and to avoid the temptations of Satan ; for pardon is given to what
is sinful So too indulgence is given in what concerns sin, or at
all events a lesser good, as S. Thomas has rightly observed.

2. That there is no precept given here is also evident, because
the Apostle permits married people to contain for a time, that they
may give themselves to fasting and to prayer ; therefore, if they agree
to devote their whole life to fasting and to prayer, he permits them
to contain themselves for life.

3. He says come together, and gives the reason, “that Satan
tempt you not for your incontinency;” /.<?., that there may be no
danger of your falling into adultery, or other acts of impurity, because
of your incontinency. Therefore, when the cause does not exist,
viz., the danger of incontinency, as it does not exist in those who
have sufficient high-mindedness to curb it and tame it, he permits
them to be continent for life.

4. He says in ver. 7, “I would that all men were even as I my-
self,” i.e. t not chaste in some way or other, but altogether continent,
unmarried, nay, virgin souls, even as I, who am unmarried. So
Ambrose, Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, Chrysostom, CEcumenius
and Epiphanius (Hares. 78), S. Jerome (Ep. 22 ad Eustoch.)

5. In the early days of the Church many married persons, in obe-
dience to this admonition of S. Paul, observed by mutual consent
perpetual chastity, as Tertullian tells us (ad Uxor. lib. i. c. vi., and
de Rcsurr. Cam. c. 8, and de Orland Virg. c. 13). The same is said
by the author of commentaries de Sing. Cleric ., given by S. Cyprian.

Here are some examples of married persons, not merely of low
estate, but people illustrious both for their birth and holiness and
renown, who preserved their continency and chastity unimpaired in
wedlock.

(1.) There are the Blessed Virgin and Joseph,, who have raised the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHASTITY IN THE MARRIED 13I

banner of chastity not only before virgins, but also before the married.
(2.) We have the illustrious martyrs Cecilia and Valerian, who were
of such merit that the body of S. Cecilia has been found by Clement
VIII. in this age, after the lapse of so many centuries, undecayed and
uninjured. (3.) There are SS. Julian and Basilissa, whose illustrious
life is narrated by Surius. (4.) S. Pulcheria Augusta, sister of the
Emperor Theodosius, made a vow to God of perpetual chastity, and
on the death of Theodosius, married Martian, stipulating that she
should keep her vow, and raised him to the Imperial throne; and
this vow was faithfully kept unbroken by both, as Cedrenus and
others testify. (5.) We have the Emperor Henry II. and Cunegund,
the latter of whom walked over hot iron to prove her chastity.
(6.) There is the example of Boleslaus V., King of the Poles, who
was called the Maid, and Cunegund, daughter of Belas, King of the
Hungarians. (7.) King Conrad, son of the Emperor Henry IV., with
Matilda his wife. (8.) Alphonse II., King of the Asturians, who by
keeping himself from his wife gained the name of “the Chaste.”
(9.) Queen Richardis, who, though married to King Charles the Fat,
retained her virginity. (10.) Pharaildis, niece of S. Amelberga and
Pepin, was ever-virgin though married, (n.) Edward III. and
Egitha were virgin spouses. (12.) Ethelreda, Queen of the East
Angles, though twice married, remained a virgin. (13.) We have two
married people of Arvemum, spoken of by Gregory of Tours (de
Gloria Conf c. xxxii): “When the wife was dead, the husband
raised his hands towards heaven, saying : 4 1 thank Thee, Maker of
all things, that as Thou didst vouchsafe to intrust her to me, so I
restore her to Thee undefiled by any conjugal delight.' But she
smilingly said : 4 Peace, peace, O man of God ; it is not necessary to
publish our secret' Shortly afterwards the husband died and was
buried in another place; and, lo ! in the morning the two tombs
were found together, as it is to this day : and therefore the natives
there are wont to speak of them as the Two Lovers, and to pay
them the highest honour.” Nowadays two examples of the same
thing may be found.

Ver. 7 . — For I would that all men were even as I myself* That

Digitized by v^,ooQle

132 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

is so far as the single life and continency is concerned. The Apostle
means that he wishes it if it could well be. I would \ therefore,
denotes an inchoate and imperfect act of the will. This is evident
too from his subjoining,

But every man hath his proper gift of God. The word all again
means each one, or all taken one by one, not collectively. For if
all men in a body were to abstain, there would be no matrimony,
and the human race and the world would come to an end together.
In the same way we are said to be able to avoid all venial sins : that
is, all taken singly, not collectively, or in other words, each one.
Others take all collectively, inasmuch as if God were to inspire all
men with this resolution of continency, it would be a sign that the
number of the elect was completed, and that God wished to put an
end to the world. But Paul was well aware that God at that time
was willing the contrary, in order that the Church might increase
and be multiplied through matrimony. The first explanation there-
fore is the sounder.

But every man hath his proper gift of God \ one after this manner
and another after that. That is, he has his own gift of his own will,
says the treatise de Castitate> falsely assigned to Pope Sixtus III.,
which is preserved in the Biblioth. SS. Patrum , vol. v. It is, however,
the work of some Pelagian ; for the tenor of the whole treatise is
to show that chastity is the work of free-will, and of a man’s own
volition, and not of the grace of God (Cf. Bellarmine, de Monach.
lib. ii. c. 31, and de CUricis % lib. i c. 21, ad. 4.) But this is the
error of Pelagius ; for if you take away the grace of God from a
man’s will it can no longer be called “his proper gift of God” For
the will of a man is nothing else but the free choice of his own will.'
For God has given to all an equal and similar gift of free-will;
wherefore that one chooses chastity, another matrimony, cannot be
said to be the gift of God if you take away His grace ; but it would
have to be attributed to the free choice of each man, and that choice
therefore in diverse things is unlike and unequal

Proper gift then denotes the gift of conjugal, virginal, or widowed
chastity. But heretics say that priests therefore, and monks, if they

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE GIFT OF CHASTITY

133

have not the gift of chastity, may lawfully enter on matrimony. But
by parity of reason, it might be said that therefore married people, if
they have not the gift of conjugal chastity, as many adulterers have
not, may lawfully commit adultery, or enter upon a second marriage
with one that is an adulterer. Or again that if a wife is absent, is
unwilling, or is ill, the husband may go to another woman, if he
alleges that he has not the gift of widowed chastity. And although
the passion of Luther may admit this excuse as valid, yet all shrink
from it; and the Romans and other heathen, by the instinct of
nature, regarded all such tenets as monstrous.

I reply, then, with Chrysostom and the Fathers cited, that the
Apostle is here giving consolation and indulgence to the weak, and
to those that are married, for having embraced the gift and state of
conjugal chastity, when before they might have remained virgins.
For of others that are not married he adds, It is good for them if
they abide even as I ; that is, it is good for them, if they will, to
remain virgins ; but this I do not command, nay, I am consoling
the married, and I permit them the due use of wedlock, in order
that they may avoid all scruple, by the reflection that each one has
his own gift from God, and that they have the gift of wedlock, £
conjugal chastity; for matrimony itself is a gift of God, and was
instituted by Him. God wills, in order to replenish the earth, in
a general and indeterminate way, that some should be married;
and yet this gift of wedlock is less than the gift of virginity.

It may be said that not only is matrimony a gift from God, but
that one is a virgin and another married is also a gift from God.
I answer that this is true enough, as when God inspires one with
a purpose to lead a single life, and another a married life ; as, e.g. t
in the case of a queen who may bear an honest offspring to the
good of the realm and the Church ; but still God does not always
do this, but leaves it wholly to the decision of many whether they
will choose the married or unmarried life.

It will be retorted, “ How, then, is it that the Apostle says that
each one has his proper gift of God?” I answer that this word
gift is of two-fold meaning: (1.) It denotes the state itself of

Digitized by v^,ooQle

134 first epistle to the Corinthians, c. vii.

matrimony, or celibacy, or religion ; (2.) The grace that is necessary
and peculiar to this or that state. If you take the first, then each
man’s own gift is from God, but only materially , inasmuch as that
gift which each one has chosen for himself and made his own
is also from God. For God instituted, either directly or by His
Church, matrimony and celibacy and other states, and gave this
or that state to each one according as he wished for it; and in
this sense each one has his own gift, partly from God and partly
from himself and his own will. But properly and formally , that
this gift or that is proper to this or that man, is often a matter
of free-will. Yet it may be said to be so far from God as the
whole direction of secondary causes, and all good providence
generally is from God For God in His providence directs each
one through his parents, companions, confessors, teachers, and
through other secondary causes, by which it comes to pass that
one devotes himself, though freely, to matrimony, another to the
priesthood. For all this direction does not place him under
compulsion, but leaves him free.

Here notice 1. that the Apostle might have said, “Every man
hath his proper state of himself, having chosen it by an exercise
of his free-will;” but he chose rather to say that “every man
hath his proper gift of God,” because he wished to console the
married. Lest any one, therefore, who was of scrupulous conscience
and penitent should torture himself and say, “Paul wishes us to
be like him, single and virgins; why ever did I then, miserable
man that I am, enter into matrimony? It is my own fault that
I did not embrace the better state of virginity, that I have de-
prived myself of so great a good, that I have plunged myself
into the cares and distractions of marriage” — for this is how
weak-minded, troubled, and melancholy people often look at things,
and especially when they find difficulties in their state ; and there-
fore they seek after higher and more perfect things, and torture
themselves by attributing to their own imprudence the loss of
some good, and the miseries that they have incurred — Paul, then, to
obviate this, says that the gift, in the sense explained above, is not

Digitized by v^,ooQle

“GIFT” EXPLAINED

133

of man but of God. And therefore each one ought to be content
with his state and calling, as being the gift of God — ought to be
happy, perfect himself, and give thanks to God.

2. Gift may be the grace befitting each state. The married
require one kind of grace to maintain conjugal fidelity, virgins
another to live in virginity ; and this grace peculiar to each is formally .
from God, because, it being given that you have chosen a certain
state, whether of matrimony, or celibacy, or any other, God will give
you the grace that is proper to that state to enable you, if you will, to
live rightly in it For this belongs to the rightly ordered providence
of God, that since He has not seen fit to prescribe to each of us his
state, but has left the choice of it, as well as most other things, to
our own free-will, He will not forsake a man when he has made his
choice, but will give him the grace necessary for living honestly in
that state. For God and nature do not fail us in things necessary,
especially since God, as the Apostle says, wishes all men to be saved,
whatever their state. Consequently He will supply to all the means
necessary to salvation, by which, if they are willing, they will be
enabled to live holily and be saved. For else it would be impossible
for many to be saved, as, e.g. y for religious and others who have taken
a vow of chastity, for one married who has bound himself to a
person that is hard to please, infirm, or detestable. To meet and
overcome such difficulties they need to receive from God proper
and sufficient grace. For neither the married can be loosed from
matrimony, nor the religious from their vow, to adopt some other
state more fitting for them.

In this the sense of this passage is : Choose whatever state you
like, and God will give you grace to live in it holily. So Ambrose.
And that this is the strict meaning of the Apostle is evident from the
words, “ For I would f which import : I have said that I allow, but
do not command, the state of wedlock ; for I would that all would
abstain from it, and cultivate chastity, and live a single life ; but still
each one has his own gift — let him be content with that, let him ex-
ercise that. Let the single man who has received virginal or widowed
chastity, the grace by which he can contain himself, look upon

Digitized by v^,ooQle

136 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

it as the gift of God; let the married, who has received conjugal
chastity, the grace of using wedlock chastely, look upon it as the
gift of God, be content with it, and use it as such.

Hence it follows (1.) that God gives to monks, even though they
be apostates, the gift of sufficient grace to enable them, if they will,
to live chastely ; that is to say, if they pray to God, give themselves
to fasting, to holy reading, to manual labour, to constant occupa-
tion. Otherwise they would be bound to an impossibility, and God
would be wanting to them in things necessary, and they would not
have the gift proper to their state, although the Apostle here asserts
that each one, whether unmarried, or virgin, or married, has the gift
of chastity proper to his state.

It follows (2.) that if any one changes his state for the better, God
also changes and gives him a greater gift, and a greater measure of
grace befitting that state, for this is necessary to a more perfect
state. So the Council of Trent (Sess. xxiv. can. 9) lays down : “ Jf
any one says that clerks who have been placed in Holy Orders , or
regulars who have solemnly professed chastity , and who do not think
that they have the gift of chastity , can lawfully enter into matrimony ,
let him be anathema } since God does not deny it to them that seek for
it, nor suffer us to be tempted above that we are able”

Hath his gift of God ’ The gifts of God are twofold. 1. Some
are wholly from God. So the gifts of Nature, which is but another
name for God, inasmuch as He is the Author and Maker of Nature,
are talent, judgment, memory, and a good disposition. The gifts
of grace again are faith, hope, charity, and all the virtues infused by
God, as the Author of grace.

2. Other gifts are from God indeed, but require for their due
effect our co-operation. For example, all prevenient grace and good
inspirations are gifts of God ; so all good works, and the acts of all
virtues, are gifts of God, says S. Augustine, because He gives (a)
prevenient grace to excite us to these works and these actions, and
(b) co-operating grace, by which He works with men to produce
such things. Yet this grace so acts that man is left free, and has
it in his power to act or not, to use this grace or not In this sense

Digitized by v^,ooQle

POWER OF GRACE

137

all good works are gifts of God: yet they are free to man, and
subject to his will and power. Of this second class the Apostle is
here speaking in connection with the gift of chastity. The gift of
chastity is, strictly speaking, an infused habit, or an acquired habit
in those who already have it infused. But for those who have not
yet the habit, there is sufficient help of grace, both internal and
externa], prepared for each one by God, so that by freely co-operat-
ing with it, each one may live in chastity, if he is willing to use
that help. And this is evident from what is said in vers. 25, 35, 38,
about the single life being counselled by God and Christ, who puts
it before all men, and advises them to adopt it But God does not
advise a man to anything which is not in his power ; but the single
life is not in the power of each man, unless his will is helped by the
grace of God. Therefore Christ has prepared, and is prepared to
give to each one, this grace that is necessary to a single life and to
virginity. If he is ready to give to eaoh one virginal chastity, much
more conjugal. Whoever, therefore, has his proper gift, that is his
proper grace, in its beginning, will have it also in its perfect ending,
if he will only pray to God earnestly and constantly to give him
the grace prepared for him, and then co-operate vigorously with the
grace that he has received.

Ver. 8. — Isay, therefore , to the unmarried and widows , It is good for
them if they abide even as I I am unmarried : let them remain the
same. Hence it is most evident that S. Paul had no wife, but was
single.

Ver. 9. — But if they cannot contain , let them marry, for it is better to
marry than to bum. This may be a reference to Ruth i. 13. It is
better to marry than to burn, unless, that is, you are already wedded
to Christ by a vow. Cf. S. Ambrose (ad Virg. Laps. c. v.). For to
those who are bound by a vow of chastity, and are professed, as
well as for husbands, it is better to bum and commit fornication
than to marry a second time. For such marriage would be a per-
manent sacrilege or adultery, which is worse than fornication, or
some momentary sacrilege ; just as it is better to sin than to be in
a constant state of sin, and to sin from obstinacy and contempt.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

138 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

But it is best of all neither to marry, nor to burn, but to contain, as
Ambrose says; and this can be done by all who have professed
chastity, as was said in the last note, no matter how grievously they
may be tempted. The Apostle found it so in his sore temptation, as
many other saints have done, and especially he to whom the devils
exclaimed, when they were overcome by him and put to confusion
through the resistance he made to their temptation: “Thou hast
conquered, hast conquered, for thou hast been in the fire and not
been burnt”

Bum here does not denote to be on fire, or to be tempted by the
heat of lust, but to be injured and overcome by it, to yield and con-
sent to it For it is not he that feels the heat of the fire that is said
to be burnt by it, but he that is injured and scorched by it So
Virgil sings of Dido, who had been overcome by love for ^Eneas
(/En. 4, 68) : " The ill-starred Dido bums and wanders frantically
about the city.” Cf. also Ecclus. xxiii. 22. The Apostle is giving
the reason why he wishes the incontinent and weak to marry, viz.,
lest they should bum, i.e., commit fornication; others, who are
combatants of great soul, he wishes to contain. In other words, let
those who do not contain marry, for it is better to marry than to
burn. So Theodoret, Ambrose, Anselm, S* Thomas, Augustine
(de Sancta Virgin . c. 74), Jerome (. Apolog . pro Lib . contra Joviti .).
“It is better,” says S. Jerome, “to marry a husband than to commit
fornication.” And S. Ambrose says : “ To bum is to be at the mercy
of the desires ; for when the will consents to the heat of the flesh it
bums . To suffer the desires and not be overcome by them is the part
of an illustrious and perfect man”

It may be objected that S. Cyprian ( Ep . n ad. Pompon . lib. L)
says of virgins who have consecrated themselves to Christ, that “ if
they cannot or will not persevere, it is better for them to marry
than to burn.” But Pamelius, following Turrianus and Hosius, well
replies that S. Cyprian is not speaking of virgins already consecrated
but of those about to be. These he advises not to dedicate and
vow themselves to Christ if they do not intend to persevere ; and
in the same epistle he points out that they would be adulterous

Digitized by v^,ooQle

VIRGINITY AND MARRIAGE

139

towards Christ if, after a vow of chastity, they should be wedded to
men. Like the Apostle here, he is speaking, therefore, not of those
who are already bound, but of those who are free. Erasmus there-
fore is wrong and impudent, as usual, in making a note in the margin
of this passage of S. Cyprian's, “Cyprian allows sacred virgins to
marry.”

It may be objected secondly that S. Augustine says (de Sancta
Virgin . c. 34) that those vowed virgins who commit fornication would
do better to marry than to bum, /.<?., than to be consumed by the
flame of lust

I answer (1.) that this is a mere passing remark of S. Augustine's,
meaning that for such it would be better, /.<?., a less evil to marry
than to commit fornication. He does not deny that they sin by
marrying, but he only asserts that they sin less by marrying than
by committing fornication. In the same way we might say to a
robber, “ It is better to rob a man than to kill him,” ue., it is a less
evil. (2.) For such it is even absolutely better to marry than to
bum, if only they enter into wedlock lawfully, that is to say, with
•the consent of the Church and a dispensation of their vow of
continency from the Pope. (3.) Possibly, and not improbably, S.
Augustine's meaning was that even for those who have no such
dispensation it is better to marry than to commit fornication per-
sistently, /.<?., to live in a state of fornication and concubinage.
And the reason is that such a one, if she marries, sins indeed
grievously against her vow by marrying ; yet still, after her marriage
she may keep her vow of chastity and be free from sin, viz., by
not exacting, but only paying the marriage debt, as the women
commonly do of whom S. Augustine is here speaking. If, however,
such a one is constantly committing fornication, she is by repeated
acts constantly breaking her vow, and she consequently sins more
grievously than she would by marrying. For those acts of fornica-
tion constantly repeated seem to be a far worse evil and more
grievously sinful than the single act of entering into a contract of
marriage against a vow of continency. For though this one act
virtually includes many, viz., the seeking and paying of the marriage

Digitized by v^,ooQle

140 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

debt as oft as it shall please either, yet this is only remotely and
implicitly. But one who commits fornication constantly sins
directly and explicitly, and daily repeats such actions; therefore
he sins more grievously. For it is worse to sin explicitly and in
many acts than by one tacit and implicit actioa

Observe also that at the time of S. Augustine those maidens who
had vowed and professed chastity, though they might sin by marry-
ing, yet might contract a lawful marriage. For the Church, as S.
Augustine gives us plainly enough to understand, had not at that
time made the solemn vow an absolute barrier to matrimony. More-
over, it is evident from his next words that S. Augustine is of opinion
that such ought simply and absolutely to keep their vow of chastity ;
for he adds : “ Those virgins who repent them of their profission and
are wearied of confession , unless they direct their heart aright , and
again overcome their lust by the fear of God \ must be reckoned among
the dead. n

Lastly, that the Apostle is here speaking to those who are free,
and not to those who are bound by a vow, is proved at length
by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, (Ecumenius, by Epipha-
nius (Hceres, 61), Ambrose (ad Virgin . Lapsam c. 5), Augustine
(de Adulter. Conjug . lib. Lc. 15), Jerome (contra Jovin , lib. i.). S.
Ephrem, 1300 years ago, being asked to whom this verse applies,
wrote a most exhaustive treatise about it, in which he abundantly
proves that it has to do, not with religious or the clergy, and those
who have taken a vow of chastity, but with seculars who are free.

Vers. 1 o, 1 1. — And unto the married I command , &c. The Apostle
now passes from the question of marriage to that of divorce; for,
as this verse indicates, the Corinthians had put to Paul a second
question, one relating to divorce. Granted that in matrimony its
use was lawful, nay obligatory, as S. Paul has said, at all events may
not one that is faithful to his marriage vow dissolve it and have a
divorce ? And again, when a divorce has taken place, may not the
wife or the husband marry again ? This verse and ver. 1 1 give the
answer to the question.

He says let her remain unmarried. Hence it follows that divorce,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

DIVORCE

141

even supposing it to be just and lawful, does not loose the marriage
knot, but only dispenses with the marriage debt ; so that if the wife
is an adulteress it is not lawful for the innocent husband to enter
into another marriage. And the same holds good for the wife if the
husband is an adulterer.

We should take notice of this against the heretics Erasmus,
Cajetan, and Catharinus, who say that this cannot be proved from
Scripture, but only from the Canons. But they mistake, as is
evident from this passage of S. Paul’s. For the Apostle is here
speaking evidently of a just separation made by the wife when she
is innocent, and injured by her husband committing adultery, for he
permits her to remain separated, or to be reconciled to her husband.
For if he were speaking of an unjust separation, such as when a
wife flies from her husband without any fault on his side, he would
have had not to permit of separation but altogether to order a
reconciliation.

It may be said that the word reconciled points to some offence and
injury done by the wife who caused the separation, and that therefore
S. Paul is speaking of an unjust separation. I reply by denying the
premiss. For reconcile merely signifies a return to mutual good-will ;
and the offending party is spoken of as being reconciled to the
offended just as much as the offended to the offending. For instance,
in 2 Macc. i. 5, it is said “ that God may hear your prayers and be
reconciled to you.” The Councils and Fathers explain this passage
in this way, and lay down from it that fornication dissolves the
marriage bond so far as bed and board are concerned, but not so
that it is lawful to marry another. Cf. Concil. Milevit. c. 17 ; Concil.
Elibert c. 9 ; Concil. Florent. ( Instruct Armen . de Mdtrim .) ; Concil.
Trident (Sess. xx. can. 7); Pope Evaristus (Ep. 2); S. Augustine
de Adulter . Conjug . (lib. ii. c. 4); S. Jerome {Ep. ad Am and .) ;
Theodoret, CEcumenius, Haymo, Anselm and others.

It may be said that Ambrose, commenting on this verse, says that
the Apostle speaks of the wife only, because it is never lawful for her
to many another after she is divorced ; but that it is lawful for the
husband, after putting away an adulterous wife, to many another,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

142 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

because he is the head of the woman. I answer that from this and
similar passages it is evident that this commentary on S. Paul’s
Epistles is not the work of S. Ambrose, or at all events that these
passages are interpolations. For in matrimony and divorce the same
law governs the wife which governs the husband, as the true Ambrose
lays down (in Lucam viii. and de Abraham , lib. i. c. 4). What then
the Apostle says of the wife applies equally to the husband ; for he
is speaking to all that are married, as he says himself ; and moreover,
in ver. 4, he declared that the marriage rights of husband and wife
are equal, and that each has equal power over the other’s body.

Let not the husband put away his wife . /.<?., without grave and

just cause ; for it is allowed to put her away because of fornication
and other just causes.

Ver. 12 . — But to the rest speak I ... let him not put her away.

The rest are those that are married and belong to different
religions ; and to them I say, that if a brother, i.e., one of the faithful,
have a wife that is an unbeliever, &c. In other words, I have thus
far spoken to married people when both are of the number of the
faithful, as I implied in ver. 5, when I said “that ye may give your-
selves to prayer.” Now, however, I am addressing those of whom one
is a believer, the other an unbeliever. This is the explanation given
by many together with S. Augustine, who will be quoted directly.

But if this is so it is certainly strange that the Apostle did not
express himself more clearly, for by the addition of a single word he
might have said more simply: “To the faithful who are married
it is not I that speak but the Lord ; but to the rest, viz., to those mar-
ried couples of whom one is an unbeliever, I speak, not the Lord.”
But by saying not to the faithful , but unto the married , , he seems to
speak in general terms of all that are married, whether believers or
unbelievers. Nor is it to be objected to this that in ver. 5 he speaks
casually to the faithful, for there he is excepting from the general
law which governs the manage debt those of the faithful who are
married, when by mutual consent they give themselves to prayer.
But this exception is not to be made to cover all the marriage laws,
which the Apostle in this chapter is laying down for all who are

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MIXED MARRIAGES 143

married. Moreover, the Apostle so far has not said a single word
about the unbeliever, or about a difference of religion.

Hence we may say secondly and better, that the rest are those
who are not joined in matrimony. For by the words but and the
rest this verse is opposed to ver. io, as will appear more clearly
directly.

Speak /, not the Lord. “ I command,” says Theodoret. But S.
Augustine (de Adulter. Conjug. lib. i. c. 13 et seq.\ Anselm, and S.
Thomas interpret it : I give the following advice, viz., that the believ-
ing husband is not to put away an unbelieving wife who lives at
peace with him, and vice versd.

There is a third interpretation, and the best of all, given us from
the Roman, Plantinian, and other Bibles, which put a full stop after
the words, But to the rest speak J 9 not the Lord, thus separating them
from what follows and joining them to what precedes. We have then
the meaning as follows : To the rest, viz., the unmarried, the Lord
gives no command ^supply command from ver. 10), but I say, and I
advise what I said and advised before in ver. 8, viz., that it is good
for them to remain as they are, unmarried.

This interpretation too is supported by the antithesis between the
rest and the married, by which it is clear that the rest must be the
unmarried, not married people of different faiths. Moreover, he
explains himself in this way in ver. 25, where he says, “ Now, con-
cerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my
judgment,” which is identical with he says here, “To the rest speak
I, not the Lord.”

If any brother hath a wife that believeth not. This is the third
question put to Paul by the Corinthians : Can one of the faithful
that is married live with an unbelieving partner ? S. Augustine and
others, as I have said, connect these words with the preceding, which
then give as the meaning : Although Christ permitted a believer to
put away his wife that believeth not, yet I give as my advice that he
do not put her away ; for to put her away is neither expedient for
her salvation nor for that of the children, if she is willing to live
with a believer without casting reproach on her Creator and on the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

144 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

faith. Hence many doctors, cited by Henriquez ( de Matrim . lib.
xi. c. 8), gather indirectly by analogy that, since Paul forbids what
Christ permits, one of the faithful that is married may, by Christ’s
permission, put away an unbelieving partner that refuses to be
converted, and contract another marriage. On the contrary, when
both are believers, neither is allowed this, as has been said. But
if we separate these words, as the Roman Bible does, from the
preceding, by a full stop, nothing of the kind can be proved. Nay,
Thomas Sanchez (de Matrim . voL ii. disp. 73, no. 7), who does not
read any full stop, as S. Augustine does not, and so refers these words
to what follows, thinks that all that is exactly to be gathered from
this is that Christ permits to a married believer separation a toro ,
but not dissolution of a marriage entered into with one that
believes not In the third place, this passage might be explained
to mean that Christ laid down no law on this matter, but left it to
be settled by His Apostles and His Church, according to needs of
different ages, as, e.g. 9 the Church afterwards declared the marriage
of a believer with an unbeliever null and void, if one was a believer
at the time of the marriage. According to S. Augustine’s reading,
this rendering is obtained with difficulty ; according to the Roman,
not at all For all that the Apostle means is that the believer is
not to put away an unbeliever, if the latter is willing to live with
the former. Cf. note to ver. 15.

Infidelity in S. Paul’s time was no impediment that destroyed
a marriage contracted with a believer, nor did it prevent it from
being contracted, if the believer ran no risk of apostatising, and
if the unbeliever would consent to live in peace with the believer,
retaining his faith, as S. Paul here lays down. But now by long
custom it has become the law of the Church that not heresy but
infidelity not only impedes, but also destroys a marriage which
any one who was a believer at the time might wish to contract with
an unbeliever.

Ver. 14. — For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife .
Such union by marriage is holy. The believer, therefore, is not,
as you so scrupulously fear, defiled by contact with an unbeliever,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE BELIEVING WIFE

but rather the unbeliever, as Anselm says, is sanctified by a kind
of moral naming and sprinkling of holiness, both because he is
the husband of a holy, that is a believing, wife, and also because
by not hindering his wife in her faith, and by living happily with
her, he as it were paves the way for himself to be converted
by the prayers, merits, words, and example of his believing wife,
and so to become holy. So did S. Cecilia convert her husband
Valerian ; Theodora, Sisinnius ; Clotilda, Clodaevus. So say Anselm,
Theophylact, Chrysostom.

S. Natalia, the wife of S. Adrian, is illustrious for having not
only incited her husband to adopt the faith, but also most gloriously
to undergo martyrdom for it. For when she had heard that women
were forbidden to serve the martyrs, and that the prison-doors
would not be opened to them, she shaved off her hair, and having
donned man’s dress, she entered the prison and strengthened the
hearts of the martyrs by her good offices. Other matrons followed
her example. At length the tyrant Maximianus discovered the
fraud, and ordered an anvil to be brought into the prison, and the
arms and legs of the martyrs to be placed on it and smashed with
a crow-bar. The lictors did as they had been ordered ; and when
the Blessed Natalia saw it, she went to meet them and asked them
to begin with Adrian. The executioners did so, and when the leg
of Adrian was placed on the anvil, Natalia caught hold of his foot
and held it in position. Then the executioners aimed a blow
with all their might, and cut off his feet and smashed his legs.
Forthwith Natalia said to Adrian, “I pray thee, my lord, servant
of Christ, while your spirit remains in you, stretch forth your hand
that they may also cut that off, and that you may be made like the
martyrs in ail things: for greater sufferings have they endured
than these.” Then Adrian stretched out his hand, and gave it to
Natalia, who placed it on the anvil, and then the executioners cut
it off Then they took the anvil away, and soon after his spirit
fled. Cf. his life, September 8th.

It is worth our notice what Gennadius, Patriarch of Constanti-
nople, writes, in his exposition of the Council of Florence (Sess. v.) of

VOL. i. k.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

I46 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

Theophilus, a heretic and not a heathen emperor, son of Michael
the Stammerer, who was saved by the prayers of his wife Augusta.
He had made an onslaught on images, and his mouth was in con-
sequence so violently pulled open that men might see down his
throat This brought him to his senses, and he kissed the holy
image. Shortly afterwards he was taken away to appear before the
tribunal of God, and through the prayers offered for him by his wife
and by holy men he received pardon ; for the queen in her sleep
saw a vision of Theophilus bound and being dragged by a vast
multitude, going before and following. Before him were borne
different instruments of torture, and she saw those following who
were being led to punishment until they came into the presence of
the terrible Judge, and before Him Theophilus was placed. Then
Augusta threw herself at the feet of the Dread Judge, and with
many tears besought Him earnestly for her husband. The terrible
Judge said to her : “ O woman, great is thy faith ; for thy sake, and
because of the prayers of thy priests, I pardon thy husband.” Then
He said to His servants : “ Loose him, and deliver him to his wife.”
It is also said that the Patriarch Methodius, having collected and
written down the names of all kinds of heretics, including Theophilus,
placed the roll under the holy table. Then in the same night on
which the queen saw the vision, he too saw a holy angel entering
the great temple, and saying, “ O Bishop, thy prayers are heard, and
Theophilus has found pardon.” On awaking from sleep he went
to the holy table, and, oh ! the unsearchable judgment of God, he
found the name of Theophilus blotted out. Cf. also Baronius
(Anna/, vol. ix., A.D. 842).

Else were your children unclean . If you were to put away a wife
that believed not, your children would be looked upon as having
been bom in unlawful wedlock, and as therefore illegitimate. But,
as it is, they are holy, i.e., clean — conceived and bom in honourable
and lawful wedlock. So Ambrose, Anselm, Augustine (de Peccat.
Mentis, lib. ii. c. 26). In the second place they would be strictly
unclean, because they would be enticed into infidelity, and edu-
cated in it by the unbelieving parent, who had sought for the divorce

Digitized by

Google

CHILDREN— HOW HOLY

147

through hatred of his partner ; and especially if it is the father that
is the unbeliever, for in such cases the children for the most part
follow the father. But if the believer remain in wedlock with the
unbeliever, the children are holy , because, with the tacit permission
of the unbeliever, they can easily be sanctified, baptized, and
Christianly educated through the faith, the diligence, and care of
the believer. So S. Augustine (de Peecat, Mentis . lib. iii. c. 12),
and after Tertullian, S. Jerome (ad Paulin, Ep, 153). It is from this
passage that Calvin and Beza have gathered their doctrine of imputed
righteousness, teaching that the children of believers are strictly
holy, and can be saved without baptism. They say that by the very
fact that they are children of believers they are regarded as being
bom in the Church, according to the Divine covenant in Gen. xvii.
7 : 41 1 will be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee.” Similarly,
in the Civil Law, when one parent is free the children are bom free.

But these teachers err. For (1.) the Apostle says equally that the
unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife. But it is
not precisely correct to say that such a man is sanctified through his
wife; neither, therefore, is it strictly true of the child. (2.) The
Church is not a civil but a supernatural republic, and in it no one is
born a Christian ; but by baptism, which has taken the place of cir-
cumcision, every one is spiritually born again and is made holy, not
civilly but really, by faith, hope, and charity infused into his soul.
This is the mind of the Fathers and the whole Church. (3.) It is
said absolutely in S. John iii. 5, that 44 except a man be born again of
water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
It is therefore untrue that any one not born of water, but merely of
believing parents, can enter into the kingdom of God.

Ver. 15. — But if the unbelieving depart , let him depart. If the
unbeliever seek for a dissolution of the marriage, or will not live with
his partner without doing injury to God, by endeavouring to draw
her away to unbelief or to some wickedness, or by uttering blasphemy
against God, or Christ, or the faith, then, as Sanchez lays down from
the common consent of the Doctors of the Church (vol. ii. disp, 74),
he by so acting is rightly regarded to wish for a separation ; then let

Digitized by v^,ooQle

148 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

the believer depart from the unbelieving, because it is better, says S.
Chrysostom, to be divorced from one's husband than from God.

Observe that the Apostle in this case allows a separation, not only
a toro but also a vinculo ; and therefore the believer may contract
another marriage, this being a concession made by Christ in favour
of the faith ; otherwise a Christian man or woman would be subject
to slavery. For it is a grievous slavery to be bound in matrimony
to an unbeliever, so as not to be able to marry another, and to be
bound to live a life of celibacy, even if the unbeliever depart. So
S. Augustine (de Adulter \ Conjug. lib. i. c. 13), S. Thomas, and S.
Ambrose, who says : “The marriage obedience is not owing to him
who scoffs at the Author of marriage, but in such case remarriage is
lawful”

Further, many doctors, cited by Henriquez (de Afatrim. lib. xl c.
8), amongst whom is S. Augustine (de Adulter. Conjug. lib. L c. xix.),
gather from this verse and from verse 12 that the believer whose
unbelieving partner is not willing to be converted, even though he
may be willing to live with her without injury to God, has by this
very fact a right to enter upon a new marriage. But S. Paul and the
Canonical decrees (cap. Quanto , cap. Gaudemus , tit de Divort, and
cap. Si Infidelis 28, qu. 2) only deal with the case where the un-
believer wishes to depart, or where he is a blasphemer against the
faith. And, therefore, other doctors, cited by Henriquez, think that
in this case it is lawful for the believer to marry again. And this
opinion is the more sound not only for the reason given above, but
also because the Fathers who support the first opinion rely on glosses
on the various capitula, which are merely glosses of Orleans, and if
anything darken the text.

Moreover, no gloss by itself can be the foundation of a right,
or of a new law. Since, therefore, it is agreed that the marriage
of unbelievers is true marriage, and that it is not dissolved by the
conversion of either party, because there is no law of God or of
the Church to dissolve it, it follows that they must hold to their con-
tract, which by its very nature is indissoluble. This is strengthened
by the consideration that each party possesses good faith ; therefore

Digitized by v^,ooQle

DIVORCE WHEN LAWFUL

149

it cannot be set aside, unless it is agreed that either or both have
no right to this marriage, or that one loses his right through the
conversion of the other. This, however, is not agreed on, but is
highly doubtful. In matters of doubt the position of the possessor
is the stronger, and he ought not to be ousted from it because of
any doubt that may arise.

Nevertheless, Sanchez adds (disp. 74, num. 9) that it is lawful
for the believer to marry again, because it is now forbidden by the
Church to live with an unbeliever who will not be converted,
because of the danger of perversion which exists nearly always.
The unbeliever is then looked upon as having departed, because
he refuses to live with the believer in a lawful and proper manner.
But Sanchez means that the Church now forbids in general a
believer to continue to live with an unbeliever. But this is denied
by Navarrus and others ; for though the Fourth Council of Toledo
forbids a believer to live with an unbeliever if he is a Jew, this
was done merely because of the obstinate tenacity of the Jews to
their creed. Neither here nor elsewhere is marriage with a heathen
forbidden.

Moreover, the Council of Toledo was merely local, and this
same canon has been differently interpreted by different authors,
as Sanchez says (disp. 73, num . 6). And in truth it would be hard
and a just cause of offence if, in India, China, and Japan, when the
faith is first preached, Christians should be compelled to put away
the wives that they had married when unbelievers, or if wives
should be compelled to leave their husbands who were unwilling
to be converted to Christianity, especially when they were in high
position ; for occasion would be taken from thence to exterminate
Christians and their faith. The case is different in Spain and
amongst Christians, where the Church might, without causing
scandal, enact this, either by a general law (which as a matter of
fact does not exist, as I have said), or by use and custom, by for-
bidding individuals in particular to remain in marriage with one that
was not a believer, because of the danger of perversion. Such a
precept it would be the duty of the believer to obey, and therefore

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ISO FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

it would not be he that was in fault, but the unbeliever, who, by
refusing to live in marriage, according to the law binding on the
believing partner and the precept of the Church, becomes the
cause of the separation. By so acting, the unbeliever will be
reckoned to wish for separation, and consequently it would be
lawful for the believer to contract another marriage, as Sanchez
learnedly argues. For example, Queen Csesara, wife of the King
of the Persians in the time of the Emperor Mauritius, fled secretly
to Constantinople, and was there converted and baptized. When
her husband requested her to return, she refused to do so unless
he became a Christian. He then went to Constantinople and was
there baptized, and assisted out of the font by Augustus, and
having received his wife again, he returned joyfully to his home.
This happened about the year 593, as Baronius relates on the
authority of Paul the Deacon and Gregory of Tours. All that
has been said must be clearly understood to refer to matrimony
contracted when both parties were unbelievers, followed by the
conversion of one and the refusal of the other to be converted ;
for matrimony contracted by an unbeliever with a believer has
been declared null and void by the Church since the time of S.
Paul; and thence it is that difference of faith is a barrier to
matrimony. This was the reason why Theresa, sister of Adel-
phonsus, King of Li&ge, refused to marry Abdallah, King of the
Arabs, unless he adopted the Christian faith. This he promised,
but falsely. Therefore on the arrival of Theresa he forced her,
in spite of her struggles ; but being smitten by God with a sore
disease, he was unable to be cured without sending back Theresa
to her brother. This is told by Roderic, Vazseus, and Baronius
(a.d. 983)*

S. Eurosia too, daughter of the King of Bohemia, having been
taken prisoner by the King of the Moors, chose death rather than
marriage with him ; and while she was patiently awaiting the sword
of the executioner, she heard an angel saying, “ Come, my elect, the
spouse of Christ, receive the crown which the Lord hath prepared
for you, and the gift that your prayers shall be heard as often as the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

WHY BELIEVER MAY DEPART

151

faithful call upon you for help against rain or any storm whatso-
ever.” Having heard these words, her arms and legs having been
lopped off, she gave up the ghost, being renowned for her miracles,
as Lucius Marinaeus Siculus relates (de Rebus Hispan. lib. v.).

But God hath called us unto peace. Peace of conscience with God,
and of agreement with men. Therefore, on our part, let us not de-
part from unbelieving husbands, but live with them as peacefully as
we can. Secondly , and more fitly, peace here stands for that rest and
tranquil life to which the Apostle is urging the married believer.
Such a life in separation and solitude is to be preferred to marriage
with an unbeliever who wishes to depart, and who is perpetually
provoking the believer to quarrel, and disturbing his peace. This
better agrees with the mention of departure which has gone just
before these words, and of which I shall have more to say.

Ver. 16. — For what knowest thou , O wife 9 whether thou shalt save
thy husband ? If we take the first meaning of “ peace” given above,
the sense will be : Live in peace as far as you can, O believer, with
your unbelieving partner, for you know not the good that he may
derive thence : perhaps by living with him you will convert him and
save him. So Chrysostom, Ambrose, Anselm, Theophylact, and
others. If we take the second meaning of peace, the sense will be
still better. Peace is the gift of Christ ; to this have we been called
by Christ, not to unhappy and quarrelsome slavery. If, therefore,
the unbeliever seeks by quarrels, abuse, by threats against the faith
and against his faithful partner, to drive her away, let her depart and
live peacefully, and give up all hope of his conversion. For what
ground of hope is there of one that is a heathen, blasphemous, and
quarrelsome ? Therefore, what do you know, or whence do you hope
to save him ?

Ver. 17. — But as God hath distributed to every man , as the Lord
hath called every one , so let him walk . I have said thus much about
the marriage of an unbeliever with a believer, and about separation
and divorce, if the unbeliever seek for it, and about living together
in peace ; but I do not wish to be understood to mean that a divorce
is to be sought for, or that peace is to be broken, merely through

Digitized by v^,ooQle

152 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

lust and a desire to change one’s state, as, e.g., that a believer, because
he is a believer and called to Christian liberty, may desire and find
an excuse for changing his servile condition into one of freedom,
his position as a Gentile into that of a Jew. I ordain, therefore,
that each one of the faithful, whether he be a Jew or a Gentile,
bond or free, maintain the state and condition which the Lord
has given him, and which he had before he became a believer.
Let each one walk in his own line ; let him be content with that,
and live as becometh a Christian; let him not grow restless to
change his state because of his Christianity, and so cause the
Gentiles to stumble.

This seems to be the answer to a fourth question put to Paul
by the Corinthians, viz., whether Christians who had been slaves
before conversion became free when they were made Christians
— Christian liberty, it might seem, calls for this; and, again,
whether Gentiles who had been made, or were about to be made
Christians, ought to be circumcised as the Jews. For the Apostles
and the first Christians were Jews, and were made into Christians
out of Judaism, and hence some thought that Judaism was a
necessary medium between heathenism and Christianity. To both
questions Paul gives an answer in the negative.

Ver. 1 8 . — Let him not become uncircumcised \ For the possibility
of the actual restoration of the forsaken, see Celsus {lib. vil c. 25).
For its actual use by apostate Jews, see 1 Macc. L 18, and
Josephus {Antiq. lib. xii. c. 6) and Epiphanius (de Ponder, et
Afesur.). The latter says that Esau was the author of this practice,
and that therefore it was said of him : u Esau have I hated.” He
also tells us that Jews, when they passed over to the Samaritans,
were commonly circumcised a second time, and that Symmachus,
who was as famous as Aquila and Theodotion as an interpreter of
Holy Scripture, was so treated. Similarly, the Anabaptists baptize
again those who have left their ranks and then returned. There is
a reference to this perhaps in Martial’s Epigram, where he speaks
of not flying from the circumcised Jew, and in Juvenal’s [Bor. i. Sat.
v. 100], saying, “Let the uncircumcised Jew believe it ; I will not.”

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHRISTIAN FREEDOM

153

S. Jerome, in commenting on Isa. liii., gives these words a mystical
and symbolical meaning : “ Art thou called being unmarried, then
do not marry.” But this is outside the literal meaning.

Ver. 19. — Circumcision is nothing. It neither profits nor prevents
the salvation of a Christian. He is treating of converted Jews, as
appear^ from what has gone before. So Cajetan, Ambrose, Anselm.

Ver. 20. — Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was
called \ If one that is circumcised, or that is a slave, or married,
come to Christianity, let him not on that account change his state,
but remain circumcised, a slave, or married. The state was to be
retained, provided it were one that was lawful and honest S.
Cyprian refused to admit actors to the sacraments of the Church.

S. Ephrem ( Adhortat \ 4, vol. ii.) says well: “In whatever work
you have been called, \ strengthen your anchors and ropes , that you may
be safe , as if in port, from all storms , and that your ship may not be
driven out into the ocean .”

Ver. 21. — Art thou called being a servants Care not for it Be
not anxious about your state, as though slavery were inconsistent
with your Christian profession ; be rather glad that you have been
set free by Christ from the slavery of sin and death, and made the
servant of God, even though in this life you are the servant of man,
so long as it shall seem good to God. Cf. the apophthegms quoted
in the notes to ExocL L 12.

There is a golden saying of S. Augustine ( Sentent \ num . 53) ; He
says : " Whatever evil a master does to the righteous is not punishment
for misdoing but a trial of their virtue . For a good man , even though
he be a slave , is free ; but a bad man , though he be a king , is a slave;
nor does he serve one person only , but , what is far worse , he has as
many masters as vices Again (rtum. 24), he says : “ God's service is
always freedom, for He is served, not of necessity but from love."

But if thou mayest be made free , use it rather. 1. Use that slavery

as a cause of humility to the glory of God. Hence Theodoret
explains it thus: Grace knows no difference between slavery and
freedom. Do not, therefore, flee from slavery as though it were
inconsistent with the faith ; but, if it is possible for you to obtain

Digitized by v^,ooQle

154 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

your freedom, yet go on as a slave and await your reward. So too
it is explained by S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and S. Thomas. What
follows is in perfect harmony with this exposition.

2. It is better, however, to explain it thus: If you gain your
freedom, embrace it and enjoy it. The word rather points clearly
to this meaning, for who is there that would not prefer freedom
to slavery, especially if he is a slave of an unbeliever, so that he
cannot serve Christ freely? S. Paul clearly advises this after-
wards when he says, “Ye are bought with a price : be not ye the
servants of men.”

We should notice that the Apostle is here speaking not of
hired servants, such as are found among Christians now-a-days,
but such as were the absolute property of their master, such as
the Gentiles had, even when converted to Christianity, such as
even now Christians have from the Turks and Moors. The oppo-
sition is between slaves and free men.

S. Jerome (in Apolog. pro lib . ad Jovin.), following Origen
(in Epis . ad. Rom. lib. i.), explains this passage of the service of
matrimony. “ If, like a slave, you have been bound to matrimony,
care not for it ; do not torture yourself as though it were impossible
to live a godly life when married and attain salvation. Still, if
you can persuade your wife to set you free and let you live
separately as a single man, rather choose this.” But the former
sense is the simpler and more relevant.

Ver. 22. — For he that is called in the Lord being a servant.
These words, by a common Hebrew mode of speech, refer to the
first clause of the preceding verse, and not to the words immediately
preceding. The Apostle’s chief aim here is to teach slaves to be
content with their servile condition, and to bear it patiently, until
God in His providence should appoint them another by giving
them their freedom. They have been already called in the Lord \
i.e., by the Lord, to the faith and grace of Jesus Christ.

Is the Lords freedman. Has been set free by Christ, and called
to Christian liberty. Slaves, if they become Christians, are not
to seek to be set free from their master’s service, but are to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHRIST’S FREEDMAN

155

Tejoice that they have been called from the service of sin into
the freedom of grace and adoption of the sons of God. Cf.
Chrysostom here, and Horn, xix. (in Morali.), where he shows
that there is no antagonism between slavery and Christianity.

Ver. 23. — Ye are bought with a price . By the blood of Christ,
which is called the price of our redemption. So Ambrose. Christ
bought and redeemed you with a heavy price from the slavery
of sin, and has made you children, and, therefore, be not ye the
servants of men : do not sell yourselves into slavery if you can
enjoy freedom. This civil freedom befits the freedman of Christ,
and in it he can more completely serve Christ, more so than he
does any owner, especially one that is a heathen.

Constantine the Great, about the year 330, in honour of Christ,
and as an indulgence to His religion, decreed that no Jew should
have a Christian slave. Any Jew who should disobey was to be
beheaded, and his slave set at liberty. He thought it impious
that Christians, who had been redeemed by the death of Christ,
should be subjected to the yoke of slavery by those who had
slain the Redeemer. This law was confirmed by the three sons
of Constantine (Sozomen, lib. iii. c. 17). S. Gregory too ordered
that the slave of a Jew who wished to be converted to Christianity
should at his admission become free (lib, iii. Ep . 9). The Fourth
Council of Toledo (cap. 64) has a similar enactment.

This is to be understood of Jews and pagans who are subject to
the jurisdiction of some Christian prince. The Christian slaves of
such become by that very fact free, and may therefore leave their
master ; nay, if they are unbelievers, they may fly to the Church to
become Christians and therefore free. For of these the laws say :
In the case of those unbelievers who are not temporally subject to
the Church or her members, the Church has not laid down the
above-named right, although she might rightly do so. For she has
the authority of God ; and unbelievers, by reason of their unbelief,
deserve to lose their power over believers, who are transferred into
children of God. But this the Church does not do, in order to
avoid scandal, as S. Thomas says (pt ii. qu. x. art. 10).

Digitized by v^,ooQle

156 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

Others not amiss explain this passage thus: Do not be the
servants of men in such a way as to neglect the obedience owing to
God. For they become servants of men who regard the opinion of
men above all things, and flatter them even when they do wrong,
and obey and serve them in all things, even when they order them
to sin. So S. Chrysostom and Jerome (in Ep . ad Eph, vL). For in
Eph. vi. the Apostle bids servants serve their masters, not as men-
pleasers, but as serving the Lord, and for the Lord’s sake.

Ver. 24. — Brethren , let every man wherein he is called therein abide
with God, Whatever a man’s state when he comes to Christianity,
whether bond or free, in that let him stay. With God implies that
by so doing he will serve God, for if otherwise the Gentiles would
complain that Christianity made their slaves restless and ambitious
of liberty.

Ver. 25. — Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the
Lord: yet I give my judgment, I have no command that they are to
remain virgins and serve God in that state, but I advise them to
do so. This is the fifth question of the Corinthians, and the answer
is that the law of Christ has no precept bidding them remain
virgins, but that it is better for all to do so.

From this passage is proved the common opinion of the Fathers,
that the single life is in our power if we seek it from God, and strive
after it with undaunted fortitude, and co-operate with God’s grace
through the appointed means. In this way every one can, if he
likes, live unmarried, however much he may be by nature or habit
inclined to impurity. Tertullian teaches this (de Monogam .), Chry-
sostom, Origen, Jerome (in S. Matt c. xix.), Ambrose (de Viduis\
Augustine (Enarr, in Ps. cxxxviii.), who says, “He who bids you
take the vow, Himself helps you keep it.” And again (Conf. lib. v i.
c. 11): “I know that Thou wouldst give me continence if I were
but to deafen Thy ears with my inward groaning.” S. Paul too
plainly implies the same thing in this verse and in ver. 7, where he
recommends virginity to alL He would not counsel us nor order
us to do anything but what lay in our own power, i,e , 9 save what we
can do with the grace of God which God has prepared for us, and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

VOLUNTARY VIRGINITY 1 37

which He offers to us, only waiting for us to ask for it, and to be
willing to co-operate with it.

Christ teaches the same in S. Matt xix., where, on the Apostles’
saying that, because of- the burden and difficulties of matrimony, it
was not expedient to marry, He gave His approbation to what they
said, adding : (i.) “All men cannot receive this saying.” Origen and
Nazianzen (Orat, de tribus Eunuch, Gener.) take this, “all are not
capable of this saying,” understanding by capacity the natural
leaning towards chastity, which all have not. But others take it
better as meaning that all men do not receive this saying as vessels
receive liquids : they do not approve of it, do not understand it, do
not embrace chastity because of its difficulty. Hence Christ adds :
(2.) “There be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs,”
viz., of their own free will they have made themselves chaste, and
have strengthened their purpose by a life-long vow. For this is the
signification of the word eunuch — moral impotence. If the mean-
ing is otherwise, it would have been better for Christ to say, “ There
be some who are making themselves eunuchs, or endeavouring to'
make themselves eunuchs.” So S. Jerome, Epiphanius (Bares.
58), Fulgentius (de Fide ad Petrum , c. iil), Augustine (de Sancta
Virgin, c. 30).

Christ adds (3.) that these eunuchs have made themselves such,
not because of the inconveniences of marriage, nor even because
of the Gospel, that they may preach it better, as heretics wrest
these words of Christ, but “ for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,” i.e. y
that they may merit to obtain it. So Origen, Hilary, Chrysostom,
Euthymius, and S. Augustine (de Sancta Virgin, c. 23).

Lastly, Christ ends by saying : “ He that is able to receive it, let
him receive it.” These are the words of one who is exhorting and
urging others to heroic virtue as well as to an illustrious reward. By
these words, therefore, Christ puts before all a counsel of chastity
as a thing that is most heroic and excellent. Christ does not say,
says Chrysostom, all cannot, but all do not receive it, i.e., all in-
deed can receive it, but all do not wish to» He says : “ The power
of making themselves eunuchs has been given by God to those

Digitized by v^,ooQle

153 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

that have sought for it, have wished for it, and have laboured to
obtain it.

It may be objected, Why, then, does Christ say, “He that is
able to receive it, let him receive it?” For by these words He
implies that all cannot receive it I reply that by the words he
that is able 9 He merely means that it is a hard and difficult
matter. In other words, he who is willing to force himself, who
is willing to strive with all his might to accomplish so arduous a
task, let him receive it and obtain it. So in the comic writer it
is said, “I cannot, mother, take this woman as my wife,” i.e., I am
unwilling, because it is difficult for me to do so, because this wife
does not please me. Frequently also in Scripture the difficult is
spoken of as impossible. Again, all cannot contain by their own
power, but by received power they can. They can pray, and
by their prayers and co-operation obtain for themselves an imme-
diate power of continence.

Although, therefore, all have not the gift of continency enabling
them actually to contain, as all the righteous have not the gift of
perseverance to enable them actually to persevere in grace; yet,
just as all the righteous have the gift of perseverance by which
they can, if they like, persevere, so can all have the gift of
continency if only they seek for strength from God for it, and
co-operate with God’s grace coming through the appointed meahs.
It is different with the gift of prophecy, and other gifts that are
given gratuitously, which frequently we can obtain neither by prayer
nor by co-operation. Nevertheless, since there are some who
both by nature and use are prone to lust, and have not the spirit to
labour earnestly after that heroic virtue which by the grace of
God they might have, but easily allow themselves to be led
astray by nature and habit, so as to yield to the temptations of
lust, hence it is better for them and others equally weak to enter
into matrimony, “for it is better to marry than to burn.” Cf.
vers. 2, s, 9.

As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful I I
counsel virginity, as being he who has been mercifully called to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE PRESENT DISTRESS

159

the grace of Apostleship among the Gentiles, in order to counsel
them faithfully. So Ambrose, Anselm, Theodoret. In other
words, the more unworthy I am when compared with the other
Apostles, the greater is the mercy and grace with which I have
been called to the apostolate, and the more incumbent is it upon
me to be faithful, and to give faithful counsel to those to whom
I have been sent by Christ.

Ver. 26 . — I suppose , therefore , that this is good. Either virginity,
with Ambrose and others, or else that they remain virgins, as was
said in the note to ver. 25.

For the present distress. The necessity, say some, of travelling
about to evangelise the whole world, which would be difficult for
one who was hampered by a wife and children. But Paul is
not writing this to Apostles or Evangelists, but to the citizens of
Corinth; and, therefore, others understand a reference to the
distress of the persecutions and flights in the primitive Church.
The virgins were well able to escape from tyrants, but the married,
being weighed down with wife and children, found this difficult.
At that time, therefore, celibacy was preferable to marriage. This
is the way that heretics understand this passage.

But Calvin finds fault with this. He admits that the Apostle
here counsels celibacy for the whole world and in all ages,
even in such peaceful times as our own ; but he understands the
distress to be the disquiet and the various afflictions by which
the saints are harassed in this life, because of which celibacy
is to be counselled before matrimony. But this, though true, is
far-fetched. I say, then, that the present distress is that which the
Apostle defines and explains in vers. 28 and 29, and is two-fold.
And here observe that the Greek word for present has two signifi-
cations : (a) the literal present, opposed to the future, as in Rom. viii.
38 and 1 Cor. iii. 22; ( \b ) it signihes imminent, urgent, pressing.
Both meanings are suitable here.

1. This present distress is that which is incumbent on matrimony,
and inseparable from it, arising from the difficulties, annoyances,
and troubles, such as child-bearing, labour, the bringing up of

Digitized by v^,ooQle

160 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

children, the cares, anxieties, rivalries, quarrels, and maintenance
of the family ; the solicitude to grow rich and to form good alliances
by marriage; overbearingness on the part of the husband; hasti-
ness of temper, drunkenness, extravagance, poverty, bereavement,
and the constant distraction of mind springing from all these,
and the being occupied about such things. Explaining himself
in ver. 28, he calls all these “trouble in the flesh,” and opposes
this to the pleasure of marriage. So Ambrose, Anselm, Chrysostom,
TheophylacL

2. It is simpler and more obvious to say that the present distress
is the shortness of this life, which is always pressing upon us, and
hurrying us onwards towards death and eternity. The present
distress thus denotes the shortness of the time which is given
us to gain eternal life, and which, therefore, is to be given, not
to the world nor to matrimony, but to the soul and to God. So
Chrysostom, Anselm, and S. Jerome {cant Jovin. lib. i.). “ This
distress ,” he says, “is the necessity of dying shortly.” In this
short life we have the necessity laid on us of pleasing God, and
of carefully preparing good works, that so we may live in bliss
throughout eternity. Therefore we are counselled to virginity;
for virginity can give itself wholly to God, while the married are
distracted by the burdens of wedlock. As the ant throughout
the summer lays up store of grain for the winter, so should we
collect merits for eternity. S. Paul explains this distress in ver.
29: Do you, he seems to say, long for a wife, for children, for
conjugal delights? Do you thirst for these things, and set your
affections and thoughts on them ? Is it your sole purpose to per-
petuate your name, your family, your race ? Are you heaping up
riches, buying farms, building houses, as though you would dwell
in them for ever? Recollect the saying of Horace, “Land and
home and beloved wife must be left behind” ( Carmin , . ii. 14, 21).

1. Why do you weary and torment yourself with toils ? Why buy
with such sorrows a short-lived pleasure, the fame of your name
and family? Why hope for long endurance? Transient is what-
ever you see here, whatever you lust for ; transitory this present life.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SHORTNESS OF EARTHLY LIFE

161

Thirty years of manhood is all that is given us here below. Listen
to the poet: “The short span of life forbids us to entertain any
far-reaching hope.”

2. Death is pressing upon you : towards it you are hastening with
relentless speed. Judgment awaits you; an eternity is at hand,
unending and inevitable. God is constraining you, and forcing you
to prepare yourself for it and hasten towards it.

3. God has given you this short life, this present time — not that
you may spend it in wedded bliss, not that you may found a family,
or establish a seat, or enjoy the present as though you were to
remain here for ever — but solely and entirely that in it, as the
arena for virtue, you may hasten to your goal and ti> the prize of
an eternity of bliss ; that on that bliss you should hang with eyes,
with mind, with soul, and for it earnestly strive, and keep it ever
before you as your goal and the end of all your actions. Wherefore
though the world is full of folly, there is none greater or made to
suffer more than that which so neglects its supreme and everlasting
good, and so eagerly pursues what is perishable and empty, at so
great risk of eternal damnation.

4. Reflect daily. So much of my life has now flown by that
perhaps not much is left. Every day that I live brings me nearer
to death : what if it should meet me to-day or to-morrow ? Have I
so lived as not to fear to die ? Have I laid by in store merits and
good works by which I may live throughout eternity ? On this thy
salvation turns as on a hinge : why then dost thou not give thyself
wholly to it ?

5. Why do you busy yourself about other matters ? Why do you
divide your mind between your wife, your children, your household,
so as to think throughout the day scarcely once of God or heaven ?
Why do you not collect yourself wholly for that one thing which
is needful, and choose with Mary the best part? Why hunger
after gain, wealth, position, and family alliances ? All men’s cares
— how empty are they! Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be
required of thee, and then whose shall those things be which thou
hast provided ? Your sons succeed you and forget you ; you will

VOL. 1. L

Digitized by v^,ooQle

162 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

leave all your goods to ungrateful heirs, for whom you toiled and
laboured and gave your body to death and your soul to hell. £ven
if they be grateful, they will have no power to set you free from helL

6. Have pity on your soul : on that one precious soul which God
gave you to take care of and save, bestow some thought Call
away your mind from wedlock, from your wife, from your children ;
your thoughts from your family, from the cares and business
attending on a wife, all which things distract you, drown you, and
swallow you up in the earth and earthly things.

7. Why do you not embrace that single life that I advise? It
will give you leisure for thought how you may please God, not
how you may please the world ; how you may get yourself ready
for your journey to heaven; how you may compose your ideas as
befits the judgment that is to come; how you may stand before
God. It will enable you to serve the Lord without hindrance
freely, to worship Him constantly, so as by perseverance in prayer,
fasting, and almsgiving to merit in heaven to shine in glory, to
stand close by God, and most blissfully to enjoy Him throughout
eternity — where with S. Agnes (S. Ambrose, Scrm. 90) you may
ever sing, “I am united in heaven to Him whom on earth I
loved with all the power of my mind;” and, “The kingdoms of
the world and all the glory of them I despised, because of the
love of my Lord Jesus Christ, on whom I believed, whom I loved,
and for whom I longed.”

Maldonatus (in Notts Manusc.) says : “ Because of the present
distress, the approaching end of the world, let us not involve
ourselves in earthly business such as matrimony, that so we may
prepare ourselves for that end.”

From what has been said, the argument of Jovinian and Calvin
falls to the ground. They say that the Apostle opposes the present
to the future ; therefore, if the single life is a good merely because
of the present distress, it is not so because of the future reward.
I answer that the antecedent is false; for the present distress is
that which urges us to seek to prepare ourselves in this short
life, by a single life, for our eternal reward. Moreover, S. Jerome

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CARES OF MARRIED LIFE 163

(contra Jovin . lib. i.) says : “The Apostle joins together the present
and the future, that no one may suppose that virgins are indeed
happier so far as concerns spiritual things, but not as concerns
material, when they are better off in both than those that are
married — better off in time, better off in eternity.” S. Augustine
says the same, and refutes at length this argument of Calvin’s
(de Sancta Virgin . lib. vi. c. 22), as does the Apostle here in vers.
33 and 35, as I will prove there at greater length.

That it is good for a man so to be . This is merely a repetition
of the first clause of this verse for the sake of emphasis. It is good
for a man to remain unmarried.

Ver. 28. — Jf a virgin marry she hath not sinned \ A virgin here
of course is one that is capable of matrimony — free, and unwedded,
and not dedicated to God. If such marry she does not sin. Cf.
notes to ver. 2. So Theodoret, Theophylact, Photius, and Jerome.

Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh . By letting loose
on themselves a host of ills through the bond of wedlock, says S.
Basil (de Sancta Virgin.). It is the cares of marriage, of children,
and of household matters that the Apostle means when he speaks
of trouble in the flesh . Cf. S. Augustine (de Sancta Virgin, c. 16),
S. Ambrose (de Virg. lib. i.), and S. Jerome (contra fovin.). (1.)
Trouble in the flesh , therefore, is that which has to do with the
flesh and fleshly things, and which troubles the flesh. It is opposed
to that pleasure of the flesh which is found in matrimony. This
pleasure is so counterbalanced by this “trouble” that it is scarcely
felt. For the pleasure derived from the conjugal act is very
base and brutish, and makes a man, as Alexander the Great used
to say, epileptic; it carries with it great shame, and is gone in a
moment, and is followed by numerous inconveniences. For from
the moment of its conception it is accompanied by loathing, sleep-
lessness, giddiness, melancholy, palpitation of the heart, foolish
longings, and a thorough disturbance of the bodily economy. The
grievous pains of child-bearing follow, which often end in death.
(2.) When children are born they need to be constantly washed,
fed, enswathed, clothed, put to bed, rocked to sleep, taken out

Digitized by C^ooQle

164 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

for fresh air, and kept healthy, and sung to sleep to prevent them
from crying; and so mothers have to be occupied day and night
about their children, and can think of nothing else. (3.) The
more children, the greater the number of anxieties. How great
is the grief if he happen to die, or be led by bad society into
crime and disgrace, or if he show himself rebellious to his parents;
if he waste his father’s goods by gambling and drinking, if he make
a reckless marriage 1 For even if the parents be most holy, yet it
often happens that the children are wicked, and so torture their
parents most grievously. We have examples in Adam and Cain,
Noah and Ham, Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Esau, Jacob
and Reuben with nearly all his brothers, David and Amnon and
Absalom, and many others.

It was because of these burdens attending on marriage that
S. Augustine, following S. Ambrose, would never advise any one
to marry. Possidonius, in his life of him (c. xxvii.), says that he
recommended these three things to be observed by a man of
God : (a) never to ask for any one a wife, ( b ) not to support
any one who thought of entering the army, ( c ) and in his country
not to go to a banquet when invited. The reasons he gave were
( a ) that if the married couple were to quarrel they would blame
him by whom they were united; ( b ) that if the soldier behaved
himself so as to be unsuccessful, he would lay .the blame on his
adviser ; (c) that if he frequently attended banquets, he might lose
the measure of temperance that was fitting.

But I spare you . Since you prefer the state of trouble, viz.,
matrimony, I permit it. So Ambrose.

Ver. 29 . — But this I say , brethren , , the time is short The
duration of this life is short, so that we may not think of merely
enjoying our wives and the things of this present life, but, as
strangers and sojourners, use them for a short time, in order to
travel better towards that glorious City into which we shall be
enrolled as everlasting citizens. Ambrose takes the time here
in a wider sense, as denoting the duration of the world. Time
is short, and the day of judgment is at hand : do not, therefore,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE TIME IS SHORT 1 6 $

spend your time on the temporal pleasures of the world, but
prepare yourselves for judgment

It remaineth that both they that have wives be as though they
had none . That they do not greatly devote themselves to the

things of marriage so as to give their spirit, their mind, and their
love more to their wives than to the Lord. So Ambrose and
Anselm ; S. Augustine (de Serm . Dom. in Mont lib. i. c. xiv.),
that they should by mutual consent live in chastity, if possible.

Ver. 30. — And they that buy as though they possessed not Let
them not regard themselves as possessors for ever, but only as
tenants for life. For Paul is forbidding that inordinate love of
things which makes them possess us rather than we them. We
are not to fix our heart on transitory things, nor with inordinate
affection cling to any creature that so soon passeth away. S.
Anselm, S. Augustine ( in Joan . Tract . 40), in giving to a rich man
a rule for the due use of money, says beautifully: “Use money
as a traveller in an inn uses a table, or a cup, or a ewer — as one
soon to depart, not to abide for ever.”

That God might effectually teach the Jews this lesson, He
appointed every fiftieth year to be a year of Jubilee, when all
lands that had been sold should return without payment to their
first owner. Cf. Lev. xxv. 23. He said to them in effect: I,
the Most High, have true and real dominion over your land;
and therefore it belongs to Me to lay down what conditions of
sale that I please, especially since I have put you into possession
as settlers and colonists, and wish you to always remain such.
Wherefore I will and decree that all possessions whatsoever return
in the year of Jubilee to their first owners, and that for this
reason, that you may know, says Philo (de Cherubim ), that God
alone is the true Lord and possessor of all things, and that men
have but usufruct of them, not dominion. “Hence” says Philo,
"it is clear that we use the goods of another ; that we possess in
the way of right and dominion neither glory , nor riches , nor power,
nor anything whatever , even if it be some power of the body or faculty
of the mind: we merely have the usufruct of them while we live .* 9

Digitized by v^,ooQle

1 66 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

Ver. 31. — And they that use this world as not abusing it . By
not giving themselves to it overmuch. The Latin version translates
the compound word as if it were a simple one — as not using it ;
but the meaning is the same. Not to use it is to abuse it by
holding too tightly to it ; for we must use things according to what
they are. A world that is fleeting must therefore be used loosely,
and by the way as it were, which is as though it were not used.
But if you cling to the world you abuse it, for you use a thing
that is ever changing, as though it were firm, fixed, and solid.
For abuse, as Theophylact says, is use that is immoderate— ex-
ceeding the measure and nature of the thing. Hence the Syriac
renders this passage, “Let not those that use this world use it
beyond its proper measure.” Abuse is found in 1 Cor. ix. 18 in
the sense of “use to the full.” Wherefore S. Basil {Reg. Brev.
Jnterrog. 70) says : “ The Apostle condemns abuse in the words,

1 use the world as not abusing it . 1 The very need that we have of
things that are for use is the measure of their use. He who goes be -
yond what necessity enjoins is a victim , either to covetousness , or lust \
or vain glory . 11

S. Leo {Sertn. 5 de Jej. Sept. Mensis) says excellently : u In the love
of God is no excess ; in the love of the world everything is harmful.
And therefore should we hold fast to the things that are eternal \ use
the things of time in passing , as being pilgrims hastening along the
road which takes us back to our country , and regarding whatever
good things the world has given us as rather sustenance on the road
than inducements to remain. Therefore is it that the Apostle says:
‘ The time is short , it remaineth that they that have wives be as
though they had them not , c r*c. ; 'for the fashion of this world is
passing away . 1 But it is not easy to turn aside from the blandish -
ments of form, of abundance , of novelty , unless in the beauty of
visible things we love the Creator and not the creature . 11 Again
{Serm. xu de Quadrag .), after quoting these words of the Apostle,
he adds: “ Happy is the man who , in pure self-control \ passes the
time of his pilgrimage here , and does not rest contentedly in those
things amongst which he must walk; who is a guest rather than

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE USE OF WORLDLY THINGS 1 67

a master in his earthly home ; who does not depend on human affec-
tions , nor lose sight of the Divine promises ,”

For the fashion of this world passeth away , The Greek verb
may be also translated “ is deceitful ” or “ acts falsely.” For, as S.
Augustine says (Ep, xxxix. ad Licentium ) : “ The chains of this
world gall while they seem to please , bring certain pain and uncertain
pleasure, painful fear and fearful rest ; a reality full of misery , and
an empty hope of happiness. Will you of your own accord bind your
hands and feet with these ? ” And again ( Serm , xxiiL de Verb , Apostol.)
he says : “ Temporal things never cease to enflame us with expectation
of their comings to corrupt us when they do come , and to torture us
when they have gone by. When longed for they enkindle , when
obtained they lose their value , when lost they vanish away,” And
S. Bernard says : “ Do not love the things of this worlds for they
burden us when we have them , defile us when we love them, and
torture us when we lose them”

Again, S. Gregory (lib, vi. Ep, ad Andream) says : “ Our life is as
the journey of a sailor: for the sailor stands , sits, lies down, and is
borne along whither the ship carries him. So is it with us : whether
waking or sleeping, whether silent or speaking, or walking, or willing
or not willing, through tke moments of time we are hastening daily
to our end. When, then , the day of our end comes, what good will all
that do us that we have so eagerly sought after, and so anxiously got
together ? It is not honour nor riches that we should seek after :
all these things must be left behind. But if we want to find what
is good, let us love those things which we shall have for ever ; if we
fear what is evil, let us fear those sufferings which tke lost suffer
eternally” Then, shortly after, he advises Andrew for the short
span of our life and pilgrimage here, “to give himself to sacred
reading, to meditate on heavenly words, to kindle himself with love
of eternity, to do all good works in his power with his earthly things,
and to hope for an everlasting kingdom as a reward for them. So
to live is to have a part already in the life of eternity S. Jerome
says, in his life of S. Hilarion, that “he was wont to remind every
one that the fashion of this world is passing away, and that that

Digitized by v^,ooQle

1 68 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

is the true life which is purchased by the sufferings of this pre-
sent life.”

Fashion . The nature, appearance, and fugitive state of the world,
as Ambrose and Amselm say. The Apostle does not attribute form
to the world, which is something more firm and constant, but
fashion , which is ever changeful, fugitive, and ready to vanish away.
Cf. note to Rom. xiL 2. “Do not ,” says Anselm, “ give the world
a constant love ; for the object of your love is inconstant In vain
do you firmly fix your heart on it: it flies while you love” If the world
it fugitive, so then is marriage and everything else contained in
the world.

The day flies by ; none knows the morrow’s fount, whether toil
or rest it brings : so the world’s glory fades. So too Lipsius, our
brother, a man as wise as lifted up above man and human things,
was wont with great discernment to say, when we talked together,
as we often did freely, of the vanity of knowledge and all human
things, that he had long thought of what he would have inscribed
on his tomb. It was this : “ Do you wish me to speak to you still
more loudly? All human things are smoke, shadow, vanity, stage-
play, and in one word — nothing

For all the world’s a play in which this life’s story is given. Men
are the players ; they have their exits and their entrances ; and the
place of the theatre is the earth. “ One generation passeth away
and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth for ever,”
says Ecclesiastes i. 4. On the stage are two doors — that of birth for
those coming on, that of death for those going off. Each receives
the dress fitted to his part He who personates a king will not take
away with him the purple which he wore. Soon the comedy comes
to an end. Seneca says that the same hour which gave us life began
to end it. We often hear it said : “Tell me, O farm, O house,

O prebend, O money, how many lords thou hast had, and how
many yet await thee. Tell me where is Solomon and his wisdom,
Samson and his strength, Absalom and his beauty, Cicero and
his eloquence, Aristotle and his subtle intellect. Where are the
illustrious princes, the things of old, the favour of governors,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

DEBEMUR MORTI

169

the strong limbs, the power of the princes of the world?” They
are food for worms; they have returned to the dust Tran-
sient as the morning dew, they have fled away. What seek you ?
What are you so eager for. Happy the man who was able to
despise the world !

Gregory of Nazianzen enumerates in detail and describes most
beautifully and tersely the empty and fugitive nature of everything
in this world (de Vitce Itineribus). He says : " Who am I, and
whence came I into this life ? and who shall I be , after that having
been nursed for a short time in the lap of earthy I return from the
dust to life ? Where in His universe will God place me ? Many are
the sorrows that await the traveller on life's road, \ and there is no
good amongst men unalloyed with evil \ And would that evils did
not claim for themselves the greater fart / Wealth is beset by snares ,
and the pride of high office and of thrones is the mere dream of a
sleeper . To be subject to another’s power is grievous and burdensome .
Poverty drags down ; beauty is as short lived as the lightning of
summer; youth is nothing more than a temporary glow ; old age
is the gloomy sunset of life . Words take wings , glory is but breathy
nobility old blood , strength is shared with the wild-boar , satiety is
disgusting , matrimony a bond , a large family is the mother of inevit-
able anxiety , to be bereaved is as a disease , the market is the seed-plot
of vices , rest is feebleness , arts are practised by worthless men , the
bread of another is scanty , agriculture is toilsome , the greater number
of sailors go to the bottom, } one's native land is a prison , and the region
beyond it a scorn." Then he comprehends them all in one view,
and holds up to our gaze the vanity of all things in many apt
similitudes, saying: “All things , in shorty are full of sorrow for
mortals , all human things are fearful and yet ridiculous — like to
thistle-downy to a shadow , to dew, to the idle windy the flight of a
birdy to a vapoury a dreamy a wave , , a ship , a foot-printy a breath ;
to dusty to a world perpetually changing all things as it revolves —
now stabky now rotatingy now fallingy now fixed by seasons , days,
nights, labours , death , sorrows , pleasureSy diseases , calamities, pro-
sperity. Not without great wisdom is it, O Christ, that you have so

Digitized by v^,ooQle

170 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

appointed that all the things of this life are uncertain and unstable .
Doubtless it was that we might learn to glow with love and desire of
something firm and settled , that we might tear away the mind from
thoughts of the folly of the flesh , and might preserve pure and intact
that image given us from above ; might lead a life apart from this
life t and, in short, by changing this world for another, bear with
fortitude all the difficulties and trials of this life P

S. Augustine too remarks appositely (Enarr. Ps. cx.) on the words,
“ He shall drink of the brook on the way,” that, “ a brook is the
current of man's mortality . As a brook is swollen by the rains,
overflows, roars as it goes, hurries along, and as it hurries hastens
to its end, so is the whole current of mortality . Men are bom, they
live, they die ; and while they die others are bom . What stands still
here ? what is there that does not hasten onwards ? what is there that
is not as it were collected from the rain, and on its way to the sea,
unto the deep ? ”

The fashion of this world implies that it is dressed and masked
as an actor. Just as if a man were to sell you a horse and its
trappings, you would take off its covering and examine the body
and limbs of the horse before buying — even so do here. The
world offers you for sale dressed-up honours, masked pleasures,
decorated riches. Remove the decorations, take off the masks,
look what lurks behind them: you will see that all is foreign,
slender, empty.

The Wise Man pathetically describes (v. 8) the complaint of the
ungodly, and the late remorse that follows on the love of vanity ;
and he compares it to a slight shadow, a messenger hastening by,
a ship cutting the sea, the flight of a bird, an arrow shot forth — to
thistle-down, foam, smoke, wind, and to an inn where one spends a
night S. Jerome explains these images at length in his letter to
Cyprianus, in which, commenting on Ps. xc. 4, he says: “Com-
pared to eternity the length of all time is short” Then, at ver. 6,
he says : “As in the morning the grass flourishes, and delights with
its verdure the eyes of all that see it, and then gradually withers and
loses its beauty , and is turned into hay to be trodden under foot.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ALL THINGS PASS

171

even so does the whole race of men show the freshness of spring in
childhood blossom in youth, and flourish in manhood ; but suddenly ,
when he knows not , the head turns white , the face wrinkles , the skin
contracts , and at last, in the evening of old age, he can scarcely move .
He is hardly recognised for what he used to* be, and seems almost
changed into another man; and, lastly, as Symmachus turns Ps.
xc. 10, we are suddenly cut down and fly away?

Ver. 32. — But I would have you without carefulness, and there-
fore living in virginity and celibacy.

Ver. 33. — But he that is married careth . . . how he may
please his wife. “A woman,” says Plautus, “and a ship are never
ornamented enough : he therefore that wants work had better
marry a wife and fit out a ship.”

Ver. 34. — There is difference also between a wife and a virgin.
The Latin takes the first half of this clause with the preceding,
and refers it to the husband. He that is married careth how he
may please his wife and is divided. He is distracted by many
anxieties, so that he cannot give himself to one Lord ; but God
claims a part, and his wife and children claim a part, and that the
greater. So Ambrose takes it.

But the Greeks — Chrysostom, CEcumenius, Theophylact, Basil,
and Ephrem — join them as above. The meaning, then, is that the
pursuits of a wife and a virgin are different. As Chrysostom says,
what separates a wife from a virgin is leisure and business: the
virgin has leisure, the wife has business. But S. Jerome ( contra
Jovin. lib. i.) asserts that this reading is not the true one. The
Greeks still support the latter reading, the Latins the former.

The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that
she may be holy both in body and in spirit. “ Holy ” is pure and
unstained. “ A virgin,” says CEcumenius, “ is holy in body, because
of her chastity ; she is holy in spirit, because of the close converse she
holds with God, and because of the indwelling of the Spirit?

Observe this plain testimony to evangelical counsel, and especially
to that of virginity. Paul, in this chapter, frequently commends and
counsels it (vers. 7, 8, 25, 26, 34, 35, 40). Hence Peter Martyr

Digitized by v^,ooQle

172 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

and Beza admit here that the maintenance of virginity is better
than matrimony, as Luther thought, not only as a safeguard against
temporal cares and troubles, but that it excels it also, as being
better adapted for the service of God. Still they add that virginity
by itself is not an act of worship to God, and at all events not
greater or better than marriage.

But it is certain that virginity in this state is in itself an illustrious
virtue, one by which God is honoured and worshipped, far better
and more excellent than matrimony, meriting a far greater reward,
and having its peculiar crown of glory in heaven. I say “ in this
state,” for in the state of innocence virginity would not have been
a virtue, nay, it would not have existed any more than concupiscence
would.

What has been said is proved, i. by the Apostle laying down
here that virginity is holiness of body and of spirit, and that by it
we please God. For the sense of the verse is: “As a married
woman thinks how she may preserve her beauty and adorn herself,
that she may please her husband, so a virgin thinks how she may
preserve chastity and purity, that she may be holy in body and
mind, that so she may please God.” So Anselm, Theophylact,
CEcumenius, Chrysostom, and many others. She thinks, too, how
she may adorn and increase this chastity with prayers and other
virtues, that she may be still more pleasing to God, as Ambrose
suggests. Therefore, through virginal chastity a virgin is pleasing to
God, and therefore chastity itself is holiness. So the Apostle calls
it here. If virginity is holiness, it is surely worship done to God.

2. In the following verses the Apostle speaks of celibacy as
being honourable, that is, more so than marriage; therefore celi
bacy is a virtue ; for the proper object of virtue is the good that is
honourable.

3. Virginity by itself is a branch of temperance, and is an heroic
exhibition of it, springing from the most perfect chastity, fortitude,
and resolution, and is a perfect bridling of lust It is often also
enjoined by charity, religion, or a vow. Hence I argue thus : As
concupiscence, and especially that of impurity, is an evil in itself.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

VIRGINITY IS HOLINESS

173

so to bridle it is good and pleasing to God, and to bridle it more
completely is a greater good and more pleasing to God. But
virginity does bridle it more, nay, it wholly bridles concupiscence,
whereas marriage gives it play ; therefore virginity is a greater good,
and more pleasing to God, and better than matrimony. This the
Apostle teaches us expressly in ver. 38, where he says : “ He that
giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well, but he that giveth her not
doeth better.” Hence Fulgentius (c. iv. Ep . 3) says: “So much is
virginity a virtue , that a virgin derives her name from virtue ? S.
Jerome (< contra Jovin. lib. L) says : “ Virginity is a sacrifice to Christ?

In short, this is expressly taught against Jovinian, Calvin, and
such men, by Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, Athanasius, and
Basil, in works written for the very purpose of proving this truth
about virginity, and by S. Thomas (ii. ii. qu. 152), and by all
Scholastic and Catholic doctors.

S. Aldhelm, Bishop of the West Saxons about a.d. 680, says
excellently (Bibl. SS Patrum , vol. iii. c. ix. de Laud. Virgin .) : “Since
there are three states in the Church — virginity , widowhood, \ and marriage
— we have been taught by revelation from heaven , if the scale of merits
is taken into account , that the difference fixed between them is of this
kind: virginity is as gold \ widowhood as silver , marriage as brass .
Virginity is wealth , widowhood sufficiency , marriage poverty ; virginity
is peace , widowhood release , marriage captivity ; virginity is a sun,
widowhood a lamp , marriage darkness ; virginity is a queen , widow-
hood a lord, marriage a handmaid?

Tertullian also says (Lib. de Pudicitia) : “ Chastity is the flower of
character , the body's honour , the adornment of the sexes , the foundation
of holiness, and every good mind instinctively leans towards it Although
it is seldom found and scarcely ever is life-long , yet will it abide for
a space in the world, if discipline lend its aid \ and correction keep it in
its bounds?

S. Martin once, on seeing a meadow, one part of which the oxen
• had fed on, another part rooted up by the pigs, and a third part
uninjured and variegated by different kinds of flowers, said : “ The
first part reminds us of marriage : it has been eaten down by cattle.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

174 first epistle to the Corinthians, c. vii.

but has not wholly lost the beauty of the herbage , though it retains none
of the brightness that flowers give. The second part , which the unclean
tribe of swine has rooted up , gives us a foul picture of fornication. The
third \ which has felt no injury, shows the glory of virginity : it is
covered with luxuriant herbage , in it is an abundant crop of grass, it
is adorned with flowers of all kinds , and shines as though adorned with
radiant jewels.” So Sulpitius writes {Dial. 2, c. 11).

From all this we may gather eight prerogatives of virginity and the
widowed life. 1. It is an imitation of the life and integrity of the
angels ; for the angels do not marry, but are wholly engaged on
the service of God. Virgins do the same. Listen to S. Athanasius
(de Virginitate) : “ O virginity , unfailing wealth, crown that fadeth
not away , temple of God ’ abode of the Holy Spirit, pearl most
precious, conqueror of death and hell, life of angels, crown of the
Saints,” &c. And S. Chrysostom (de Virginitate, c. xi.) : “ Virginity
far excels wedlock as heaven is above earth, as angels are higher
than men.” And S. Augustine (de Sancia Virgin, c. xiii.) : “ Virginal
as integrity is the portion of angels, and is a striving after life-long
incorruption in a corruptible body.” Again, it is the distinguishing
mark of that new race of angels planted by Christ on the earth,
as S. Jerome says ( Ep . 22 ad Eusioch . ): “As soon as the Son
of God came down to earth. He founded for Himself a new family,
in order that He who was worshipped by angels in heaven might
have angels on earth.” C£ S. Fulgentius (Ep. 3 ad Probam, c. 9).

2. Virginity is a whole burnt-offering, as S. Jerome says, when
commenting on Ps. xevi; for it devotes and consecrates to God
and Divine things the body, and with it the mind. Hence S. •
Ignatius, in his Epistle to Tarsus, calls virgins “Christ's priests.”
“ Value highly ,” he says, “ them that are living in virginity, as Christ's
priests." Hence S. Ambrose, in his comment on Ps. cxix. 5, calls
virgins “ martyrs,” because they often have a severer struggle than
martyrs, and slay for God’s sake their affections and the vital lusts
of the soul.”

3. A virgin enters into a spiritual marriage with Christ, as I
will explain at 2 Cor. xi. 2. The offspring of this marriage is not

Digitized by v^,ooQle

PREROGATIVE OF VIRGINITY

175

bodily but spiritual, viz., (a) virtuous works; (b) alms and other
offices of charity ; ( c ) holy examples, by which they bring more, souls
to serve Christ, and so bear them to Christ. So- S. Cecilia not only
converted her husband Valerian and her brother Tiburtius and
others, but also made them martyrs and virgins. Hence the Church
says of her : “ O Lord Jesus Christ, Sower of holy counsel, accept
the fruits of the seeds which Thou didst sow in Cecilia,” and,
“Thy hand-maiden Cecilia, like a bee loaded with honey, served
Thee with store of good works.”

4. Virgins are more loved by Christ than others; for Christ
as a Bridegroom loves virgins as His brides, as S. Ambrose says
(de Virgin . lib. i.). Again, He loves them as His soldiers. Hence
Ambrose says again : “ This is that celestial warfare which the
army of angels , praising God carried on on earth. ” On these
soldiers see Chrysostom (Horn. 71 on S. Matthew \

5. Virgins are the noblest part of the Church. Listen to S.
Cyprian (de Discipl. et Habitii Virgin.) : “ Now I speak to the virgins,
whose glory is the higher as their purpose is better. They are the
flower of the Church's plant, the adornment of spiritual grace, a
wine that gladdens, a complete and uncorrupted work of praise
and honour, the image of God answering to the holiness of the Lord,
the more illustrious portion of the flock of Christ T And S. Jerome
( contra f<rvin. lib. ii.) says : “ The Church s necklace is adorned
with virgins as its fairest jewels .” And Ecclus. xxvi. 15, says : “A
shamefaced and faithful woman is a double grace,” i.e., in marriage
(for he is speaking of that) ; and therefore it is much more true of
continency in the single life.

Hence S. Athanasius (de Virgin.) lays down that virginity is a
mark of true religion and of the Church. For virginity is advised,
embraced, and extolled by true religion : by infidelity and heresy it
is spoken against, rejected, and slighted. And S. Ambrose (de
Viduis) says : “ They who regard with veneration the adulteries and
lasciviousness of their gods, punish celibacy and widowhood: being
themselves ardent for wickedness , they would fain chastise those who
are zealous for virtue .”

Digitized by *^.OOQ

176 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

Wherefore heretics and infidels are not and cannot be virgins ;
for without the grace of God, the beginning of which is faith, it is
impossible, amongst so many allurements and temptations of the
flesh, to preserve chastity inviolate. Hence S. Athanasius (Apolog.
ad Constant Imp.) says : “ Nowhere else save among Christians is that
holy and heavenly precept of life-long virginity happily fulfilled!

6. S. Cyprian says that “ marriage replenishes the earth, continency
heaven;” therefore, as S. Basil says, “virgins anticipate the glory
of the resurrection;” for in this life, as in the next, they neither
marry nor are given in marriage.

7. Virgins have in heaven a more excellent reward and crown :
they follow the Lamb wherever He goes, singing a new song which
no one else can sing (Rev. xiv. 3, 4).

8. Virginity makes man like the Blessed Trinity. And all this
is as true of virgins that live in their own home as of those that live
in a monastery ; for in the time of S. Paul and Ignatius there were
no monasteries. In counselling and praising virginity, therefore, they
mean that which is maintained at home. So Philip the deacon had
at his house four daughters that were virgins (Acts xxi. 9), who were
also gifted with the spirit of prophecy, and that as a reward of their
virginity, as S. Jerome says (ad Demet .). Philip the Apostle had
before his call three daughters, of whom two grew old in virginity,
as Polycrates says in S. Jerome (de Script Eccles.). S. Theda, by
the exhortation of S. Paul, embraced virginity (S Ambrose de Virgin.
lib. ii.). S. Iphigenia, a king’s daughter, was induced by S. Matthew
to do the same (“ Abdias,” Life). So too did S. Flavia Domitilla,
daughter of Clement, a Roman consul, when urged by S. Clement
(Beda. Martyrol. 7 May.); and S. Pudentiana and Praxedes,
daughters of Pudens, a senator, and very many others. So many
were there that S. Ambrose says (de Virgin, lib. iiL): “In the
Eastern Church and in Africa there are more virgins consecrated
than there are births in Milan and all Italy. And yet the race of
men is not thereby diminished , but increased! The reason of this is,
that God is unwilling to be surpassed in generosity. If parents offer
one or two of their offspring, He gives eight or ten in their place,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

vows

1 77

giving fruitfulness and favourable labour, and filling the house with
His blessing. So did He give to Hannah five children in the place
of the one she offered to Him. So to the rich who give alms does
God give greater wealth, and greater fertility to their fields, as S.
Augustine says (Semi. 219 de Tempor .).

Ver. 35. — And I speak this for your own profit. I counsel you to
remain single for your greater perfection and growth in spirit and
in virtue.

Not that I may cast a snare upon you. Not that I wish to lay
a necessity of continency upon you, or to force you to it So
CEcumenius, Theophylact, Chrysostom. For this precept would
be a snare to those who find a difficulty in containing themselves,
because it would deprive them of the remedy against incontinence,
viz., marriage, and would drive them into the sin of fornication. It
is evident from what follows that a snare , ue ., a precept, is contrasted
with a counsel, for he goes on to say, but for that which is comely.
In other words, he says what he does about the advantage of virgi-
nity, not by way of precept but of counsel, exhorting them to the
more comely and better condition to be found in the single life.
So Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, CEcumenius.

Peter Martyr and Bucer, therefore, are wrong in supposing that
this snare is the constraint of a vow ; for such a vow is not imposed
by the Apostle or any one else, but is self-imposed, as each one
of his own free will takes a vow of chastity. He who takes a vow
of his own accord, no more casts a snare round himself than one who
of his own accord binds himself in marriage to one who is often
quarrelsome and hard to live with. Moreover, vows are not taken
except after some trial, and not without previous mature deliberation
and counsel. In monasteries, e.g. } a year of probation is given to
novices, that they may test their strength and weigh well the cost.
But if married people had such a year in which to try each other
before marriage, I fancy that many would alter their minds ; and yet
when once they are married they are compelled to live with one
that is often unknown, untried, and disliked. Why, then, should

those who have made a solemn promise to God, and have professed

VOL. I. M

Digitized by v^,ooQle

178 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

chastity, after first trying their strength and their duty, be compelled
to break their vows, which of their own accord they made to the
Lord their God?

It is far more true to say that this dogma of Bucer and the
Protestants is a snare. They say that chastity is impossible, and
consequently that it is lawful to marry after taking the vows. For
by this snare the souls of many religious, and of many married
people are destroyed, so that adultery, uncleanness, and damnation
follow. For, by persuading themselves that virginal or conjugal
chastity is impossible, they are necessarily driven by this fond opinion
into adultery and sacrilege.

That ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction . 1. The

single life affords abundant facilities for prayer and meditation
and worship. So the Magdalene, sitting at the feet of Jesus, heard
His words (S. Luke x. 39).

2. S. Jerome ( contra fovin . ) renders it not as the Latin, that
ye may have facilities for worshipping the Lord without hindrance ,
but as above. The Greek euirapcSpov has two meanings : (a) That
constant attendance on any one ; (£) assiduity in any work. As
therefore, Socrates is said to have had his attendant genius, by
whose counsel and advice he was ruled in all that he did ; and as
magi in their rings, and heresiarchs in the fabrication of their
heresy ( Iren. lib. i. c. 9 and 20) have attendant demons close at
hand to prompt them, so here, vice versd , the chaste are called
attendants upon the Lord \ i.e., His intimates and assessors, as it
were, like some terrestrial angels who always behold through their
chastity the face of their Father. Hence it is that the Fathers so
commonly compare the chaste to angels. S. Bernard, Ep. 42, says :

“ The chaste man and the angel differ in felicity , not in virtue : the
angels chastity is more blest , the man's more strong'' Climacus •
( Gradu . 15) and Basil (de Sancta Virgin.) say that by chastity
we become like God, and have a kind of celestial and Divine
incorruption. Nay, the heathen Cato used to say that our
life would be like the life of the gods if we could do without a
wife, and that so a wife was a necessary eviL In this Cato erred ;

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE POWER OF CHASTITY

179

for S. Paul tells us that, through the grace of Christ, it is not
necessary, but that both marriage and celibacy are free to every
one. Hence Sir Thomas More, on being asked why he had
married so tiny a wife, replied merrily, that out of evils he had
freely and wisely chosen the least The Wise Man says most truly
(vi. 20) : “ It is chastity that makes us likest God ; " for, as Gregory of
Nazianzen says ( Carmen de Virgin.), the Blessed Trinity is the
Virgin that all virgins imitate. He says: “The primal Triad is
a virgin ; for the Son is born of a Father that has no beginning,
for He derived His Being from none ; ” and, as Ambrose {de Virgin.
lib. i.) says : u Virginity has descended from heaven to be imitated on
earth. Transcending clouds , the air , and the angels , it has found the
Word of God in the very bosom of the Father. Elias , because he was
found to be free from all lusts of sexual delight, was taken up in a
chariot to heaven .” And it was for this reason that virgins 'were
seen by S. John, not on the mount but above it, in Rev. xiv., singing
a new song before the throne of God, and following the Lamb
wherever He goes. S. Jerome goes so far as to say that celibate
and celestial are conjugate terms. Quinctilian says that Gaius
the Jurisconsult held that celibates were “cceliles," or heavenly,
because of their freedom from the burdens of marriage. By con-
tinency we are brought back to that unity from which we slipped
away on all sides. This was well understood and shown, by the
four heroic sisters of the queen of the Emperor Theodosius, the
most illustrious of whom was Pulcheria, who made a vow of chastity
to God, and to whom Cyril wrote his book de Fide ad Reginas, of
whom Nicephorus speaks (vol. i. lib. xiv. c. ii. p. 612). He adds
that u day and night they worshipped God with hymns and praises ,
holding that idleness and ease were unbefitting the purpose with which
they had embraced virginity .”

Hence it follows that the single life is the best for acquiring
wisdom. Aristotle and other philosophers have laid this down,
and Cicero showed by his actions that he thought so. For, after
having divorced Terentia, he w r as asked why he did not marry
again ; and he said that it was impossible to at once devote

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ISO FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

one’s self to philosophy and to a wife, for he that is single and
free from other cares can wholly devote himself to wisdom.
Moreover, the single life tends to keep the heart pure, and ready
to take in wisdom. It is again wonderfully enlightened by God,
with whom it lives on terms of intimacy. For since, as the Apostle
says here, the soul that is chaste is a close attendant upon and an
assessor of God, it follows that it is also an assessor of the eternal
wisdom of God: for this is an attendant and assessor of God.
“Give me,” says Solomon, “give me, O Lord, the wisdom that
attends on Thy abodes.” Hence it is that S. Jerome (, contra Jovin.
lib. L) asserts that the Sibyls, because of their virginity, obtained
from God the gift of prophecy.

Wisdom and chastity, as twin-sisters, were the companions of S.
Gregory of Nazianzen. For, as Ruffinus (in Prolog. Apolog.) records,
and also S. Aldhelm (de Laud . Virgin, c. 12), “ when Nazianzen was
studying at Athens , he saw in a vision two beautiful maidens , sitting
one on his right and the other on his left, as he was sitting reading.
Looking askance at them , as purity bade, he asked who they were and
what they wished; but they , with more freedom than he, embraced him
and said \ * Do not be angry with us, young man , for we are well
known to you : one of us is called Wisdom, the other Chastity ; and we
are sent by God to dwell with you, because you have prepared for us a
pleasant and pure dwelling in your heart. We are your twin-sisters,
Wisdom and Chastity.'”

It follows, in the second place, that God and His angels have
such familiar communion with virgins, and give them such protec-
tion, that they attend upon them, and often preserve them safely from
the cruelty of tyrants. Of this S. Basil is a witness (de Vera Virgin.).

There is a famous instance of this in the life of S. Theophila, who
was condemned to prostitution under the Emperor Maximian ; and,
while being led to it, she prayed thus : “ My Jesu, my love, my light ?
my spirit, the guardian of my chastity and my life, look on her who
has been betrothed to Thee ; make haste to deliver Thy lamb from
the teeth of the wolf; preserve, O my Bridegroom, Thy bride;
preserve my chastity, Thou fount of chastity.” Then, when she

Digitized by v^,ooQle

DIVINE CHASTITY l8l

entered the place of prostitution, she drew from her bosom the
Gospel and read it attentively. Soon an angel stood by her side,
and smote with death the first youth who approached her, the
second with blindness, and punished the others with different
penalties, so that at last no one dared come near her. Then lust
gave way to fear ; and when many entered the place from religious
motives, they saw Theophila sitting unharmed, and intent on her
book. They saw too a youth standing near her, refulgent with light
and of ineffable beauty, sending forth, as it were, darts of lightning
from his eyes. He at length led out Theophila to the church,
and placed her in the porch, and left her with “ Peace be to thee,”
to the amazement of the heathen, who exclaimed, “Who is such
a God as the God of the Christians ? ” We have similar marvels
in the life of S. Agnes, S. Cecilia, and S. Lucy, and other virgins.
We frequently read in the lives and martyrdoms of the holy virgins
that, when they were solicited to prostitute themselves by the
promises or threats of evil-minded tyrants, and even publicly con-
demned to it, yet they all preserved their virginity, by the aid of God
and the holy angels, and even added to its merit by martyrdom.

Ver. 36. — But if any man think that he behave th himself uncomely
toward his virgin. If any one think that it is unbecoming for
himself and his daughter to be despised by men of the world,
says Ephrem, because she is of more than marriageable age, and
is not yet married, though she has passed the flower of her age,
the age when she is ripe for marriage, and need so require , if the
father think that he ought to give her in marriage, either because
she cannot contain, or because he seeks for children by her, or for
other reasons, let him do what he will \ let him give his daughter in
marriage, or keep her as a virgin, if he so prefer it.

Observe that this saying of the Apostle's does not imply that it is
in a father's power to keep his daughter a virgin if she is unwilling,
or to give her to a husband of his own choosing against her will ;
nor does it imply that the consent of the daughter is insufficient
to matrimony without that of her father or
laws have laid down, by enacting that the

1 82 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

daughters are null and void without the consent of the head of
the family. The opposite is laid down by the law natural, Divine,
and canonical. The Apostle merely says here and in ver. 37, that
it is prudent and fitting for parents, who see the inclination of
their daughters or sons to marriage, to seek by their superior
wisdom a suitable union for them, after the custom of their fore-
fathers; and he says that the son and daughter ought, in such
a matter, to follow the counsel and wish of their parents, if it be
prudent to do so, unless they can allege some sufficient excuse.
So did Abraham, Isaac, and Tobias chose wives for their sons,
and their wish was obeyed.

Let them marry. The plural is used to embrace the virgin and
her wooer, and to signify that the latter is doing the former a
dishonour, as is commonly the case; and to prevent it going
further, he says, “Let them be joined in matrimony.” So Mal-
donatus (Note).

Ver. 37. — Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart . . .
doeth well This is linked on to the preceding, let him do what he
will: if he give her in marriage he sinneth not, if he give her not
he does well — nay, both father and daughter do better.

Having no necessity . Not being compelled, say heretics, to give
his daughter in marriage, through lack of the gift of continence.
This is to say that, if for this- reason he keeps her unmarried, he does
wrong ; but he who is not under such necessity, if he keeps her
unmarried does well.

But this is a mistake : for the words having no necessity , as well
as hath power, are to be referred to the phrase to keep his virgin .
He does well who keeps his daughter a virgin, unless necessity
compel him to keep her unmarried, through poverty, infamy, or
because no one will have her, or other causes of the same kind.
For then it is a case of necessity, not of virtue. Virtue is where
no necessity compels, but w’here piety impels, as, e.g., when any
one, by an act of free-will, chooses virginity. So Chrysostom,
Theophylact, CEcumenius.

But hath power aver his own will. That is when the father can

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MARRIAGE IN THE LORD 183

do what he wills, through his virgin daughter consenting to remain
a virgin.

Observe these words of the Apostle, and learn from them that
man has free-will, even in the moral and supernatural spheres, as,
e.g 9 in the case of lifelong virginity. For the father cannot will it
for the daughter unless she freely choose and embrace it

Secondly, we might take the words having no necessity as meaning,
not being bound by any precept, but having the power of free-will to
choose without sin which he will Virginity is not a matter of
precept but of counsel ; he, therefore, that wishes his daughter to
remain a virgin is not compelled to it by any law ; yet he does
well, because he fulfils the counsel of Christ and the Apostle.

Ver. 39. — But if her husband be dead. Literally, if he be asleep.
With the faithful, death is called a sleep; for they awaken from
it at the resurrection. Hence pious Christians say, when one dies,
that he is asleep in the Lord.

She is at liberty to be married to whom she will only in the Lord.
The Greek Fathers understand in the Lord to mean, according to
the law of the Lord, which bids us marry with self-restraint, and
for the procreation of children, not to satisfy our lusts. S. Basil
says (de Vera Virgin.): “ What is it to marry in the Lord l It is
not to be dragged , as a despicable slave , to concubinage , to please the
flesh , but to choose marriage in sound judgment \ and because it will
make life more convenient. For this reason was it that the Creator
ordained marriage as a necessity in nature .”

Secondly, in the Lord means religiously, in the fear of God and
to the Lord's glory. This will be especially the case if she marry
an upright Christian.

Thirdly, and most properly, in the Lord means in His church
and religion. She may marry a Christian, So Ambrose, Theodoret,
Theophylact, Anselm, Sedulius, S. Thomas, Augustine (de Adulter.
Conjug. lib. i. c. 21).

Hence the Church afterwards, because of the danger of perversion,
and because of its unseemliness, wholly forbade a Catholic to inter-
marry with a heretic, and disannulled the marriage of a Christian with

Digitized by v^,ooQle

1 84 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VII.

a heathen. It is a mortal sin, therefore, to marry a heretic. We
must except from this Germany, Poland, and France, where here-
tics live mingled with Catholics. For there a woman that is a
Catholic is freely permitted, and, without danger of perversion, can
remain in the faith, and bring up her children in it, as is said
by S. Thomas, Sanchez ( Disp . 72, no. 3, vol. il). But all such mar-
riages are to be guarded against and dissuaded, because of the
dangers they entail. Lastly, notice against Tertullian, ,the Mon-
tanists, Novatian, that second marriages are plainly sanctioned by
this passage.

Fourthly, marriage in the Lord is that which is, according to the
laws and usages of the Church, handed down by the Apostles, who
represented the Lord and wielded His authority. The usages
instituted by the Apostles and received by the whole Church are
especially (a) that marriage should be solemnised in the presence
of the priest lawfully deputed for the purpose. “// is seemly ,” says
S. Ignatius to Polycarp, “ that men and women should be united with
the approbation of the bishop , that marriages may be entered into
according to the precept of the Lord \ and not for the sake of concupiscence. ”
( b ) Matrimony should be solemnised with a celebration of the
sacrifice of the Mass, (c) Those who are contracting matrimony
should receive the Eucharist Tertullian (ad Uxorem , lib. ii.) says :
“ How can I sufficiently describe the happiness of that marriage which
is blessed by the Churchy confirmed by the oblation, and \ when sealed , is
recorded by the angels ? ”

Vet. 40. — But she is happier if she so abide . Happier here in a
more peaceful and holy life, as well as in the greater bliss which
awaits her in heaven. So Ambrose. Hence it appears that the
state of widowhood is better than matrimony. It appears also
from what has been said before and from the Fathers, cited at ver. 7.
Cf. S. Augustine (de Bono Viduit. vol iv.) and S. Ambrose (de
Viduis , vol i.).

And I think also that I have the Spirit of God \ The Spirit of
counsel, according to which I think that I give good advice. So
Anselm and others. Observe the stress laid on /. As other

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MARRIAGE IN THE LORD 1 8 $

Apostles have, so have I also the Spirit of God. He modestly
reminds them of his authority, lest he should seem to give his
advice according to human and not Divine wisdom. S. Augustine
again observes (in Joan , tract 37) that I think is not an expression
of doubt, but of asseveration and command.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER VIII

I To abstain from meats offered to idols. 8, 9 We must not abuse our Christian
liberty , to the offence of our brethren : 1 1 but must bridle our knowledge with
charity.

N OW as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have know-
ledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet
as he ought to know.

3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice
unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none
other God but one.

5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as
there be gods many, and lords many,)

6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we
in him ; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge : for some with con-
science of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol ; and their
conscience being weak is defiled. .

8 But meat commendeth us not to God : for neither, if we eat, are we the
better ; neither, if w*e eat not, are we the worse.

9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-
block to them that are weak.

10 For if any man see tfiee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol’s
temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat
those things which are offered to idols ;

1 1 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ
died?

12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak con-
science, ye sin against Christ.

13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the
world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

In this Chapter he treats of the second general question put before him by the
Corinthians. It dealt with things offered to idols, and whether it was lawful to
eat of them.

x86

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THINGS OFFERED TO IDOLS 1 87

i. He answers that, taken by itself, such eating was not unlawful, since an

idol is nothing.

ii. He next says that it is unlawful, if conscience be wounded, or if offence

be caused to the weaker brethren. He impresses upon them that this
last is by all means to be avoided.

To understand the three following chapters, note that the things
spoken of as offered to idols are flesh, bread, wine, &c. It was not
sin simply to eat such things, as S. Thomas lays down (i. ii. qu. 103,
art. 4, ad. 3). Still it was a sin (1.) if it was out of unbelief, as, c.g.>
if any idolater ate of such things in honour of the idol, or if it were
done out of weakness of faith, as was frequently the case in S. Paul’s
time. For many had been but lately converted, and were only half-
taught, and so had not wholly cast off their old ideas about idols
and idol-offerings, and therefore still regarded them as having some-
thing Divine about them. They regarded the food offered to idols
as holy and consecrated, although the Christian faith taught them
the opposite.

2. It would be sinful if any one who thought it unlawful to eat
of such things were to go against his conscience and eat of them,
thinking, that is, that so doing was holding communion with the
idols and professing idolatry. The same would be the case if he
thought that the flesh had been polluted by the idol or devil to
whom it had been offered, and that consequently it defiled him that
ate of it. The Apostle said the same in Rom. xiv.

3. It would be a sin if any one, knowing that an idol is noth-
ing, should yet eat of things offered to idols in the presence of weak
brethren, and to show his knowledge and liberty, and so provoke
them (ver. 10) to eat of the same things against their conscience, or
to think that he, by eating, was sinning against the faith, or return-
ing to the worship of idols, and dragging others with him.

4. It would be against the Apostolic precept, given in Acts xv.
19, forbidding the eating of things offered to idols.

5. It would be a sin if eaten in such way and under such circum-
stances, as, e.g. y in the idol-temple, when the idolatrous sacrifice is
offered, as to cause others to think that it was done in honour of the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

1 88 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VIII.

idol, and in profession of idolatry, in the same way that any one
who participates in a Calvinistic supper is looked upon as professing
Calvinism. It is of this case that that S, Augustine speaks ( de Bono
Conjug. xvi.) when he says, “ It is better to die of hunger than to eat
of things offered to idols”

The Emperor Julian, in order to compel the Catholics of Con-
stantinople to some outward compliance with idolatry, forced them
all to eat of things offered to idols. The story is related by
Nectarius, Bishop of Constantinople, in a sermon delivered by him
at the beginning of Lent. He says : “He defiled all the foods that
were exposed for sale in the public markets , with sacrifices offered to
the gods , that so all might either be compelled to eat of these sacrificial
foods or perish of hunger. The faithful inquired at the oracle of the
martyr Theodore how they were to act at this crisis ; and they were
bidden from heaven to use , instead of breads boiled com for food. This
the rich generously distributed to their poorer brethren for a week ,
when the Emperor Julian , despairing of being able to accomplish
his purpose , and vanquished by the continence and constancy of the
Christians , ordered pure and undefiled food to be again sold in the
markets.”

i. We should observe here the expression, “ vanquished by the
continency of the Christians.” Their abstinence was constant and
spontaneous. For, though they might have eaten of the foods de-
filed by Julian’s orders, as though common foods, yet they refused
out of abhorrence of Julian and his idols. That they might lawfully
have eaten of them appears from the fact that Julian was unable to
defile ordinary food by bringing it into contact with things offered
to idols, or to make it sacred to devils, in such a way that one who
ate of them should be regarded as an idol-worshipper. For though
this might have been Julian’s intention, yet he was but a single
individual, and unable to alter the common judgment of men, which
regarded this not as idolatrous but as indifferent. Hence, too,
the citizens of Antioch, when Julian had in like manner polluted
their food and drink, ate and drank of them freely and without
scruple, as Theodoret tells us (Hist. lib. L c. 14). S. Augustine,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THINGS INDIFFERENT

189

too (Ep. 1 54), says that it is lawful to eat of vegetables grown in an
idol's garden, and to drink from a pitcher or a well in an idol-
temple, or into which something offered to idols has fallen. Cf.
notes to x. 21.

2. Notice, again, that there were at Corinth some who knew and
felt that this was the case, viz., that idols and the things offered to
them had no meaning; and so they ate of such things to the scandal
of those who were not so strong and not so well informed, in order
to show their knowledge and liberty. But others, less well instructed,
either had not quite cast off their old feelings about idols and idol-
sacrifices, or at all events had a lingering feeling that they were
sacred, and hence might easily relapse. This is why the Apostle,
fearing danger for such, said, in x. 14, “ Flee from idolatry.” It
led to the question being put to the Apostle by the Corinthians,
whether it was lawful to eat of things offered to idols.

3. The Apostle answers that question by saying (a) that an idol
and its sacrifice is nothing ; ( b ) that they should abstain from things
offered to idols where there was offence caused; and this is the
subject of this chapter.

4. The Apostle here only begins his answer to the question, for
he clears it up and fully replies in x. 20, 21. Not only does he
not allow them, because of the scandal caused, to eat of such things ;
but even when there is no scandal he forbids them to eat of them in
the temples, at the altars, or tables of idols, as their wont was, and
in the presence of those who offered them. For this would be to
profess idolatry, and to worship the idol in the feast which consum-
mated the sacrifice offered to it ; for this banquet was a part of the
sacrifice and its corapletibn. In this sense we must understand
Rev. ii. 14 and 20, where the angel, the Bishop of Pergamos
and Thyatira, is rebuked for allowing his flock to eat of things
offered to idols, as though they were sacred and Divine, and so
give honour to idols. For this was the stumbling-block that King
Balak, at the instigation of Balaam, put before the children of Israel :
by eating of things offered to idols they were enticed into worship-
ing Baal-Peor. (Num. xxv. 2). For the same reason it was forbidden

Digitized by v^,ooQle

190 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VIII.

by the Council of Gangra (cap. ii.) to eat of idol -sacrifices, and
also by the Third Council of Orleans (cap. xix.).

5. The Apostle says nothing of the apostolic precept of Acts xv.,
which forbade absolutely the eating of things offered to idols,
because that precept was directed to the men of Antioch and its
neighbourhood alone (ver. 23), where were very many Jews who
abhorred idols and idol-sacrifices. These had sent with the Gentiles
messengers to Jerusalem to the Apostles, that they might decide the
question about the observance of the Law. To them the Apostles
replied that the ordinances of the Law were not binding, but that,
notwithstanding, they must abstain from the eating of things offered
to idols, for the sake of concord between the Jews and Gentiles.
Afterwards, however, other heathen living far distant from Antioch,
of their own free will obeyed the command, through the reverence
they felt for the Apostles. Cf. Baronius (a.d. 51, p. 441).

Ver. 1. — Now as touching things offered unto idols we know that we
all have knowledge. We all know, though some of you may think
differently, that things offered to idols are the same as other food,
and have no greater sanctity or power. All of us who are fairly well
instructed in the faith of Christ know that they belong to the class
of adiaphora.

Knowledge puffeth up. This knowledge of yours, that idols are
nothing, and that consequently it is lawful to eat of things offered
to idols, which accordingly you do to the great offence of those who
know it not, makes you proud towards the ignorant, and makes you
look down on them. The word for puffeth up points to a bladder
distended with wind. Such, he says, is this windy knowledge. S.
Augustine (Sent. n. 241) says: “ It is a virtue of the humble not
to boast of their knowledge ; because , as all alike share the lights so
do they the truth.”

But charily edifieth. The weak and ignorant It brushes aside
such things as the eating of idol-sacrifices, which may be stumbling-
blocks to them, so as to keep them in the faith of Christ, and help
them forward in it. Windy knowledge, therefore, makes a man
proud, if it be not tempered with charity. So Anselm.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHARITY AND KNOWLEDGE

IQI

It plainly appears that this knowledge, which puffeth up, is
contrary to charity, for it induces contempt of one’s neighbours,
while charity is anxious to edify them. S. Bernard (Serm. 36 in
Can tic.) says appositely : “ As food , if not digested , generates un-

healthy humours , and harms rather than nourishes the body , so if a
mass of knowledge be bolted into the mind's stomachy which is the
memory , and be not assimilated by the fire of Christy and if it be so
passed along through the arteries of the soul \ viz ., the character and
acts , will it not be regarded as sin , being food changed into evil and
noxious humours ? ”

Ver. 2. — And if any man think that he knoweth anything, \ he
knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know . He who is puffed up at
the thought that he knows something, knows not yet the end, use
and measure of knowledge. Knowledge is given to cause humility,
to enable us t& benefit all that we can, to stand in the way of no
one, to cause offence to no one, that so we may be known and
loved by God. He is pointing at those who displayed their
knowledge about the nature of idol sacrifices, by eating of them,
though it were an offence to the untaught.

S. Bernard, in explaining this passage {Serm. 36 in Cantic.), says
beautifully : “ You see that he gives no praise to him that knoweth

many things , if he is ignorant of the measure of knoiving. That
measure is to know the order , the zeal , and the end with which we
should seek knowledge. The order is to seek that first which is more
conducive to salvation. The zeal we should show is in seeking that
more eagerly which makes us love more vehemently. The end of
knowledge is not for vain glory , curiosity , or any like thing, but only
for our own edification or that of our neighbour. For there are some
who wish to know only that they may knenv, and this is vile curiosity.
There are some who wish to know that they may be known themselves ,
and this is contemptible vanity ; such do not escape the scoff of the
satirist , 1 To know your own is nothing, unless another knows that
you know yourself.' There are some again who wish to know, that
they may see their knowledge, and this is despicable chaffering. But
there are also some who wish to know that they may edify , and this

Digitized by v^,ooQle

192 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VIII.

is charity ; and some who wish to know that they may be edified \ and
this is prudence . Of all these the last two only are not found to abuse
knowledge , for they wish to gain understanding that they may do
good” Again (de Conscientia , c. il) he says: “ Many seek for
knowledge , few conscience . If as much care and zeal were devoted to
couscience as is given to the pursuit of empty ani worldly know -
ledge, it would be laid hold of more quickly and retained to greater
advantage”

Ver. 3. — But if any man love God \ the same is known of Him .
If any, for God’s sake, love his neighbour, so as not to make him
stumble at seeing him eat of idol sacrifices, &c., but seeks instead
to edify him, then that man is approved of and beloved by God,
and in His knowledge God is well pleased.

' Note that he that loves God loves also his neighbour; for the
love of God bids us love our neighbour for God’s sake ; and the
love of God is exhibited and seen in the love of our neighbour
(1 S. John iv. 20).

Ver. 4. — We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that
there is none other God but One . An idol is not what it is com-
monly supposed to be, not what it stands for, is not God. It
has no Divine power; materially it is of wood, formally it is no-
thing. It is an image of a falsehood, or of a non-existent God.
Consequently that which is offered to idols is as such nothing,
has no Divinity or sanctity derived from the idol to which it
was offered.

The word “idol” itself is derived from the Greek «8os, which
Tertullian says denotes appearance ; and from it the diminutive,
cS8a>A.ov, was formed (de Jdolol. ciii.). An “ idol ” among the earlier
Greek writers denoted any empty and untrustworthy image, such as
hollow phantasms, spectres, the shades of the dead, and the like.
In the same way Holy Scripture and Church writers have limited
the term idol to an image of God which is regarded as God, and
is not really so, as is evident from this verse. The LXX., too,
throughout the Old Testament, apply the same term to the statues
and gods of the heathen.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

IDOLS AND IMAGES

193

Hence Henry Stephen and John Scapula are deceived and
deceive, when they lay down in their lexicons that the term idol is
applied by ecclesiastical writers to any image representing some
deity to which honour and worship are paid. It is not every statue
or image of every god that is an idol, but only the image of a false
god. Cf. Cyprian (de Exhort Mart c. i.), Tertullian (de Idolol . ),
Athanasius ( contra Idola).

The Protestant fraud, therefore, must be guarded against which
confounds idol with image, and concludes that all images are for-
bidden by those passages of Scripture which condemn idolatry. Cf.
Bellarmine (de Imagin . lib. ii. c. 5), who shows unanswerably that
an idol is the representation of what is false, an image of what
is true.

Vers. 5, 6. — For though there be that are called gods , ... to us
there is but one God , &c. The pagans have gods many and lords
many, as the sun, moon, and stars, or terrestrial gods, as Jupiter,
Apollo, Hercules ; but we have only one God, for whose glory and
honour we were created.

Notice that Scripture speaks of the Father as He of whom are
all things, as their first principle ; and of the Son as He ^ whom
are all things, as the archetype and word by whom all things were
made ; and of the Holy Spirit as in whom are all things, inasmuch
as He is the bond of love between the Father and the Son. Cf.
notes to Rom. xi. 36.

Notice also against the Arians that, when S. Paul says One God \
he is only excluding false gods, not the Son and the Holy Spirit.
When he says One Lord Jesus Christ , he is only excluding false
lords, not the Father and the Holy Spirit

Ver. 7. — Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge. Le.,
that an idol and what is offered to it are nothing.

For some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing
offered unto an idol They eat what is offered to an idol with
reverence, thinking that the idol has something that is Divine, and
that the offering was made to the deity lurking behind the idol.
So Anselm.

VOL. 1. N

Digitized by v^,ooQle

194 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, c. VIII.

Theophylact explains this verse differently, thus: “Some cat
of what has been offered to the idol, under the false supposition
that it has been changed by the idol and physically breathed upon
by a devil, and so in some way affected by him, or, at all events,
morally defiled by him, so as to be regarded to be now his property
and food, with power to change and pollute him that eateth of it
In this way they eat of idol sacrifices under the mistaken belief
that they are polluted by them.” This sense also is suitable and
likely; for there can be no doubt that, among the Corinthians
lately converted, were some who were over-scrupulous and some
over-superstitious.

And their conscience being weak is defiled. Being not fully
instructed in the faith about these matters, they go against their
conscience in following the example of others, and eating of idol
sacrifices. So Chrysostom.

Libertines do but rave when they lay down from this passage
that neither fornication, nor drunkenness, nor anything else is sin,
if the conscience has no scruples. This is to advise men to get
rid of conscience, so as to sin at pleasure. Libertines therefore
have no conscience ; and they would appear therefore to have put
aside their manhood, their reason, and all virtue. But what folly
is it to ascribe such sentiments to the Apostle ! For who is there
that sees not that the Apostle is here speaking, not of sins or of
forbidden things, but of things indifferent, such as the eating of
idol offerings ?

Ver. 8 . — But meat commendeth us not to God. The eating of
idol sacrifices or of any other food is in itself no help towards piety,
which makes us acceptable to God. Therefore, we that are strong
ought not, under the pretext of piety, to wish to use all things as
alike indifferent. The Apostle here turns to the more advanced,
and warns them to avoid giving offence to the weak.

It is foolish, therefore, as well as wrong, for heretics to wrest
this passage into an argument against the choice of food and the
fasts of the Church. Food, indeed, does not commend us to God,
for it is not a virtue ; but abstinence from forbidden food is an act

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ADIAPHORA

I9S

of temperance, obedience, and religion, and does therefore com-
mend us to God, as it commended Daniel and his companions,
the Rechabites, John Baptist, and others. Cf. notes to Rom.
xiv. 17.

For neither if we eat are we the better . If we eat of idol offer-
ings, we do not on that account abound the more in virtue, merit,
and grace, which commend us before God, and therefore we ought
not to have any desire so to eat. So Chrysostom.

Secondly, it is more simple to take this as a fresh reason to
dissuade them from eating idol-sacrifices. Whether we eat of these
things, we shall not abound any the more with pleasant food and
other good things ; or whether we eat not, we shall not be deprived
of them, for we may eat of other things. So it is often said that,
whether we be invited to a banquet or not, we shall not on that
account be full or be hungry, be fatter or leaner, richer or poorer.
He is pointing out that food is a thing of little account, and may
therefore be put aside if scandal arise, and be subordinated to
the edification of our neighbours. So Anselm.

Ver. 10. — Sit at meat in the idoPs temple . Erasmus takes the
word which we have idoPs temple to mean idol’s feast The text,
however, gives the better translation. S. Paul speaks of their sitting
at meat in an idoPs temple, or at a table consecrated to idols.
Those who were about to partake of the idol-sacrifices were wont
to have tables set out in the temple, as Herodotus says in Clio, and
Virgil ( s£n . viii. 283), in his description of the sacrifice of Evander
and the subsequent feast with the Trojans. So too did the Jews
eat of the peace-offerings in the court of the Temple (Deut. xvi. 2).

It hence follows that to eat of things offered to idols in an idol
temple is not only an evil because of the scandal it causes, but also
is an evil in itself, because it is a profession of idolatry, as will be
said at chap. x.

Anselm says tropologically : “ The knowledge of idol-offerings is
the knowledge of the vanity of heathen philosophy, poetry, and
rhetoric. This must be guarded against Far be it from a Chris-*
tian mouth to say, ‘By Jove,* or ‘By Hercules/ or ‘By Castor/

Digitized by v^,ooQle

196 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. VIII.

or to use other expressions that have more to do with monsters than
with Divine beings.”

Emboldened here is either (1.) provoked to eat of things offered to
idols, as though they were sacred and the channels of grace, and so
he will be led to sacrifice to some deity and return to idolatry ; or
(2.) he will be provoked to act against his conscience, which tells
him that food offered to an idol has been breathed upon by it
and polluted, and that therefore he will be polluted if he eat
Cf. note to ver. 7.

Ver. 12. — But when ye sin so against the brethren . . . ye sin
against Christ. For Christ reckons as done to Himself whatever
is done to one of the least of His brethren (S. Matt. xxv. 40).
Moreover, those who cause their neighbour to stumble, sin against
Christ, for by their evil example they destroy and overturn the
building of Christ, viz., their neighbour’s righteousness and salva-
tion, which Christ has built up at the cost of His own blood.

Ver. 13. — Wherefore , , if meat make my brother to offend , I will
eat no flesh while the world standeth. S. Chrysostom says: “It is
the mark of a good teacher to teach by example as well as precept.
The Apostle does not qualify what he says by adding • justly* or
i unjustly ' but he says absolutely , ‘ If meat make my brother to
offend.' He does not speak of idol-offerings as being prohibited for
other reasons , but he says that if what is lawful causes his brother to
offend , he will abstain from it \ not for one or two days , but for his
whole life. Nor does he say, 1 Lest I destroy my brother, ' but * Lest
I make my brother to offend, It would be the height of folly in us to
regard those things , which are so dear to Christ that He refused not to
die for them , as so worthless that we will not for their sake abstain
from certain food."

On the subject of offence, see S. Basil {Reg. Brevior. 64), where,
towards the end, he says that the offence is greater in proportion to
the knowledge or rank of him who gives it ; and he adds that at his
hand God will require the blood of those sinners who follow his bad
example.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER IX

I He skemeth his liberty , 7 and that the minister ought to live by the gospel:
1 5 yet that himself hath of his own accord abstained, 18 to be either chargeable ,
unto them, 22 or offensive unto any , in matters indifferent . 24 Our life is like
unto a race .

AM I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesns Christ our Lord?
A are not ye my work in the Lord ?

2 If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you : for the seal
of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.

3 Mine answer to them that do examine me is this,

4 Have we not power to eat and to drink ?

5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles,
and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas ?

6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?

7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges ? who planteth a vineyard,
and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of
the milk of the flock ?

8 Say I these things as a man ? or saith not the law the same also ?

9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of
the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is
written : that he that ploweth should plow in hope ; and that he that thresheth
in hope should be partaken of his hope.

11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap
your carnal things ?

12 If others be partakers of this power over you, are not ^e rather ? Neverthe-
less we have not used this power ; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the
gospel of Christ

13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things
of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?

14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should
live of the gospel.

15 But I have used none of these things : neither have I written these things,
that it should be so done unto me : for it were better for me to die, than that
any man should make my glorying void.

16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of ; for necessity
is laid upon me ; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel !

17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward : but if against my will,
a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.

18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may

>97

Digitized by Google

198 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the
gospel.

19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto
all, that I might gain the more.

20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to
them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are
under the law ;

21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to
God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak : I am made
all things to all men y that I might by all means save some.

23 And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof
vriihyou.

24 Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the
prize ? So run, that ye may obtain.

25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things.
Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown ; but we an incorruptible.

26 I therefore so run, not as uncertainly ; so fight I, not as one that beateth
the air :

27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection : lest that by any
means, when 1 have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

L He proceeds to show by his own example how offences are to be
avoided, and he says that he had refused to accept payment, or the
maintenance due to a preacher of the Gospel, both to gain greater
merit and for the sake of edification.

ii. He then (ver. 7) proves by six arguments (summarised in the notes to

ver. 12) that this maintenance is due to himself and other preachers
of the Gospel.

iii. He shows (ver. 20) that for the same reason he had become all things
to all men, that the Corinthians might learn how each one must care
for his own edification and the salvation of his neighbour.

iv. He urges them (ver. 24) to that same edification, pointing out that

our life is a race and trial of virtue, and in them we must run and
strive after better things, and after the prize, by abstinence and bodily
mortification.

Yer. 1 . — Am I not an apostle f am I not free t It may be asked
what connection this has with the preceding chapter; it seems to
be an abrupt transition to another subject I reply that Paul had
spoken at the end of the last chapter of the necessity of avoiding
all that might cause offence. Now, that he may enforce this, he
puts himself forward as an example, and points to his having refused

Digitized by v^,ooQle

PROOF OF APOSTLESHIP

199

to receive any payment for his preaching, and his having earned his
bread by his own labours ; this cession of his rights he made, both
to avoid causing any to offend, and to give an example of singular
virtue. He would so teach the Corinthians not to stand upon their
rights, especially in the matter of eating idol-sacrifices, out of regard
for their neighbours, if they saw that they were thus made to
stumble, or led into sin. Yet at the same time Paul, by implication,
guards in this declaration the sincerity and authority of his preach-
ing against the false apostles who impugned them; he points in-
directly to his having preached the Gospel without money and with-
out price, while the false apostles made gain out of it He says,
therefore : " Am I not an Apostle ? am I not free ? Am I not within
my rights, as the Apostle of Christ, if I demand and receive from
you means for my maintenance? Yet this I do not do, because
I wish to show you what our neighbour's salvation demands from
us, and how you ought, therefore, to avoid all causes of offence.”
Cf. Chrysostom's homily on this text (No. 20).

Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord ? Are not ye my work
in the Lordt It is clear that I am an Apostle, for I have seen
Christ, and been sent by Him to preach the Gospel. Cf. Acts ix.
5 ; xxiL 18.

Ye are my work in the Lord, because I begat you by the Gospel
in Christ Your Church was built up by me : ye are my building.

Yer. 2. — For the seal of mine Apostleship are ye in the Lord. A
proof of my apostleship may be seen in you, in my preaching, in
my miracles, in the toil and the dangers which I have either borne
or performed amongst you for your conversion ; by such things as
by Divine seals have I sealed, confirmed, and proved my apostle-
ship. All these things loudly testify that I am a true Apostle, sent
by God to teach and save you.

Ver. 3. — Mine answer to them that do examine me is this . Those
who ask about my Apostleship may take what I have said as their
answer. So Anselm. But Chrysostom and Ambrose just as suitably
refer this to the following verse.

To examine or interrogate is a judicial term, and is purposely

Digitized by v^,ooQle

200 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

used by S. Paul to point to the audacity of those who called in
question his jurisdiction.

Ver. 4 . — Have we not power to eat and to drink ? Viz., at your
expense. This is the glory and defence of me and my apostleship,
that it is gratuitous, unlike that of the false apostles. Notwith-
standing I have the same right, the same power to look for means
from you for my eating and drinking.

Ver. 5 . — Have we not power to lead about a sister , a wife , as well
as other apostles ? The Greek is aScXfjnjv ywaiica, which the Latin
version turns mulierem sororem ; and Beza, Peter Martyr, Vatablus,
and Valla render sororem uxorem . They argue from this that Paul
was married, urging that, though the Greek word stands both
for woman and wife, yet here its meaning is fixed to the latter by
the term “lead about.” Men do not, they say, lead about sisters
but wives.

They mistake: 1. Christ led about women, not as a husband
might a wife, but as a teacher is accompanied by disciples and
handmaidens, who see to his necessities. Cf. Luke viii. 3.

2. It would be absurd to call a sister a wife, and the term sister
would be superfluous.

3. The definite article is wanting in the Greek, which would
be required if a certain woman, as, e.g y a wife, were designated.

4. It is evident from 1 Cor. vii. 8 that Paul was unmarried.
This passage is explained at length in the sense I have given by
Augustine (de Opere Monach . c. iv.), Jerome {contra Jovin . lib. i.),
Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theodoret, Theophylact in their comments
on the verse, and by other Fathers generally, except by Clement
of Alexandria {Strom, lib. iii.). S. Jerome indeed says that, among
the Apostles, Peter was the only one that had a wife, and that only
before his conversion. Tertullian's words {de Monogamies) are : “ I
find that Peter alone was a husband.”

I say, then, that the phrase here is literally H sister woman,” and
denotes a Christian matron who ministered to Paul's necessities from
her means. We have a similar phrase in Acts xiii. 26, “men
brethren,” i.e y Christian men. S. Paul says then that he might,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

S. PAUL AS A CELIBATE

201

if he so saw fit, lead about a matron to support him, as much as
Peter; but he does not do so, because it might be a cause of of-
fence to the Gentiles, whose Apostle he was, and might only cause
evil surmisings. So Ambrose, Chrysostom, Theodoret, CEcumenius,
Anselm.

It may be said that Ignatius, in his letter to the Philadelphians,
classes Paul among the married. Baronius (a.d. 57, p. 518) and
others well reply that Paurs name was inserted there by later Greek
copyists, to serve as an excuse for themselves being married. The
oldest and best copies of the Epistles of S. Ignatius, including that
of the Vatican and of Sfort, have not S. Paul's name.

It may be said again that Clement of Alexandria (Strom, lib. iiL)
understands this passage of a wife of Paul. I reply, firstly, that
that is true, but that he goes on to say that after he became an
Apostle she was to him as a sister, not as a wife, which is against
the heretics, and in the second place that all the Fathers are against
Clement.

And the brethren of the Lord. Brethren is a common Hebraism
for kinsmen. James, John, and Judas are here meant. So Anselm.

And Cephas. Nay, as well as Peter, the prince of the Apostles
and of the Church.

Ver. 7. — Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges ? Just
as it is right for soldiers to be paid and to live on their pay; just
as it is right for a vine-grower to eat of the fruit of his vine, for a
shepherd of the milk of the flock that he feeds, so is it right for the
preachers of the Gospel to live of the Gospel, of their vineyard the
Church, and of their flock, the members of Christ. The Apostle is
beginning here to prove in various ways his right to receive payment
for his preaching, that all after him might know that this is owing to
preachers of the Word of God, and that he may show how unde-
niable and how clear is the right that he has freely given up by
refusing to receive payment out of regard to the Corinthians. He
so acted in order that by this generosity of his he might draw them
to Christ and help forward their salvation. I will summarise his
reasons at ver. 12.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

202 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

Ver. 8 . — Say I these things as a man t Do I prove or strengthen
my arguments by human reasons merely, and by similitudes drawn
from the life of the soldier, the vine-grower, the shepherd? By
no means. Nay, rather I establish and fortify them from the law
of God.

Ver. 9 . — For it is written in the law of Afoses y &c. Deut.
xxv. 4. The reason doubtless was that it was right that the
animals who laboured should also eat. Hence God forbade that
the mouths of the oxen that trod out the corn should be muzzled,
to prevent them from eating of what they trod out It was the
custom in Palestine, as it is now in some places, for the oxen to
thresh out the grain by treading the corn-ears with their hoofs.
That this is the literal meaning appears from the words in which
it is enjoined on the hard-hearted Jews.

It may be objected that the Apostle seems here to exclude
this meaning, by saying, “Doth God take care for oxen?”
Abulensis, commenting on Deut. xxv., says that the literal sense
of the verse is twofold: (1.) It refers to oxen, as has just been
said, but not principally; (2.) The sense which is uppermost and
chiefly intended by the Holy Spirit is that given by the Apostle here
when he speaks of preachers. God, he says, takes care for oxen in
the second place, but for teachers in the first ; and therefore it is
more the literal sense of the injunction that preachers should be
maintained than that oxen should. But it is evident that the first
only of these two is the literal sense. For the word ox denotes
a preacher typically only, and not literally. Otherwise the literal
sense would be wholly allegorical, which is absurd. For the lite-
ral sense is that which is the first meaning of any sentence; the
allegorical or typical is that which is derived from the literal As
then the shadow of a body is not the body itself, so the typical
sense cannot be the literal, but is merely shadowed forth by the
literal

The literal meaning therefore of the verse in Deuteronomy is that
which I have given, but the mystical is that which is given by the
Apostle, that preachers must be maintained, and that they are to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CLERGY SHOULD LIVE OF THE ALTAR 203

live of the Gospel, just as the ox is fed on what he treads out ; and
since God’s chief care is for the former, the mystical meaning of the
text is, as the Apostle says, the one that is uppermost

Notice that it is a matter of faith that God takes care for oxen :
for by His providence He cares for the sparrows (S. Matt x. 29),
and for the young ravens that call upon Him (Ps. cxlvii. 9), and
for all animals, as the Psalmist frequently says, and especially
throughout Psalm civ. The Apostle means, therefore, that in this
precept God’s chief care was not for oxen, but for preachers like
S. Paul, who are like oxen in labouring and treading out the corn
in the Lord’s field and threshing-floor, and are to be allowed to
live of the GospeL

Ver. 10. — Or saith He it altogether for our sakes f For our sakes
no doubt this is written. The argument is here, as so often in S.
Paul’s writings, from the mystical, not the literal sense ; or rather it
is an d fortiori argument from the literal to the mystical sense,
thus : If the ox lives on what he treads out, much more may an
Apostle live of the Gospel. CL Tertullian ( contra Marcion , lib.
v. c. 7) and Theodoret (qu. xxL in Deut .). Observe here that,
though the literal sense is the first in time, yet the mystical is
the first in importance, and the one chiefly intended by the Holy
Spirit.

That he that ploweth should plow in hope. Just as those that
plough and thresh do so in hope of being partakers of what is
reaped and threshed out, so too the preacher may hope for support
because of his preaching. Of this hope Ovid speaks ( Ep . ex Ponto ,
lib. i. vi. 30) : “ Hope it is that gives courage to the farmer, and
intrusts the seeds to the ploughed-up furrows, to be returned with
heavy interest by the kindly earth.”

From this passage we may argue d fortiori that to work in hope
of an eternal reward is an act of virtue, and that this act therefore
is meritorious. Hence the Sorbonne, as Claudius Guiliandus testi-
fies in his remarks on this passage, has defined as erroneous the
proposition that “he that strives for the sake of a reward, and
would not strive unless he knew that a reward would be given,

Digitized by

Google

204 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

deprives himself of the reward.” The Council of Trent has the
same definition (Sess. vi. can. 31).

Ver. 12. — If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we
rather t The Apostle proves by six arguments that he and other
ministers of the Word of God and the Church may receive their
expenses from their flocks: (a) By the examples of the other
Apostles (ver. 5); (b) by comparisons drawn from the practice of
soldiers, shepherds, and agriculturists (ver. 7) ; (c) from the law of
Moses (ver. 9); (d) from the example of the priests and Levites
of the Old Testament, who lived on the sacrifices offered on the
altar that they served (ver. 13); (e) from the ordinance of God
and of Christ (ver. 14); (/) from the very nature of the case, from
the positive command of God, as well as from the law of nature,
which declares that, as payment is due to a workman, so is support
to a minister of the Word, not as the price of sacred things, which
would be dishonouring to them and simoniacal, but as what is
necessary for them to fitly discharge their sacred functions for the
people’s sake. Hence this support is owing to them as a matter
of justice. So Chrysostom.

Nevertheless we have not used this power t but suffer all things. We
have not claimed our right to maintenance, but endure the utmost
poverty, and undertake every kind of evil to relieve that poverty by
working with our hands.

Lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. He would not receive
money for his support, lest he should give occasion to covetous or
injudicious men to hinder the Gospel and bring obloquy upon it.
That there was no cause of offence given here by the Apostle, but
that it was received from others, and that it was in him a work of
supererogation to refuse to receive payment, appears from what has
gone before, and from ver. 15, where he says, “It were better for
me to die than that any man should make my glorying void.”

Ver. 13. — Do ye not know that they which minister about holy
things live of the things of the temple t The priests and Levites
partake of the victims offered, and the tithes and firstfruits. The
Greek for “minister” is “labour.” The office of the priests was to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SUPPORT OF THE CLERGY

205

labour at killing, cutting up, skinning, boiling, and burning the
victims, all of which are laborious, and under other circumstances
would be the work of butchers.

And they which wait at the altar. He does not say, says S.
Chrysostom, the priests, but they which wait at the altar, that we
may see that constant attendance on sacred things is required from
the ministers of the temple of Christ, who partake of the good
things of the Temple. On the other hand, now-a-days, none are less
often at the altar than some who derive the greatest profit from
the altar and from tithes. These are condemned by the Council of
Trent.

Ver. 14. — Even so hath the Lord ordained. S. Luke x. 7 ; S.
Matt x. 10, 11, and 14.

Ver. 15. — For it were better for me to die than that any man
should make my glorying void. His glorying has for its subject the
preaching of the Gospel without charge, or his work of liberality,
free grace, and supererogation, as is evident from ver. 18. It appears
from this that it is an Evangelical counsel to preach the Gospel
without charge, as is now done by some apostolic and religious
men. So Theophylact, Theodoret, and Anselm. Cf. also Chry-
sostom and Anselm.

Observe that S. Paul does not speak of his glory but his glorying ;
viz., that that he could make before God and before men, especially
before the false apostles, who were held of great account and
sumptuously maintained by the Corinthians. Cf 2 Cor. xi. 7, for
similar “glorying.”

Ver. 16. — Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel. It appears
from this that strict injunctions were given to the Apostles (S. Matt
xxviii. 19) to preach the Gospel and teach all nations, insomuch that,
if they had neglected to do so, they would have sinned mortally.
For on those that neglect this their duty he pronounces the woe of
the wrath of God and of helL By the same injunctions all pastors,
Bishops, and Archbishops are now bound. Cf chap. L 17.

Ver. 17. — For if 1 do this thing willingly I have a reward. That
is, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, CEcumenius, and Anselm say, if I

Digitized by v^,ooQle

2C6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

freely preach without charge, I have not merely the reward given to
a work that has been enjoined on me, as other Apostles have,
but the exceeding reward of abounding glory given to a work not
enjoined, but heroically undertaken by a soul that is of its own
accord generous towards God.

But if against my will Compelled by a command of God, or
under fear of punishment. Willingly here denotes the doing a
thing of one’s own motion, one’s own accord, and free will; un-
willingly , the doing it under order, being moved and forced by the
will of another.

A dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me . I shall not
have that supreme glory I spoke of, but neither shall I sin, because
I fulfil my duty, and do what I am ordered. For this commission
of preaching the Gospel was intrusted to me. But though I do
not sin, yet I act as a slave, or as a steward in matters intrusted to
his care, not of his own accord, but merely doing what he ought to
do, because compelled to it by his Lord’s command. Cf. S. Luke
xvii. 8. So the Fathers cited understand this passage, and that this
is the meaning appears also from the context.

Some explain it differently in this way : If I preach the Gospel
willingly I have merit and reward, because of my own free will I
fulfil the command of Christ ; but if I do it unwillingly, I fail to
attain merit and reward, because I act under compulsion. A dis-
pensation of the Gospel is committed unto me, and so by me,
though unwilling, Christ’s Gospel is propagated, and others profit,
though I do not. This seems to be the simple meaning of the
words by themselves. This explanation is favoured by S. Thomas,
Lyranus, and the Ambrosian commentary ; but the context requires
the former sense.

Ver. 18. — What is my reward thent That glorious and
supreme reward spoken of.

Observe that reward is put by metonymy for merit, or for a
heroic and meritorious work, that calls for a great reward. This
work, he goes on to say, is to preach the Gospel without charge.

From these words it is evident that not all good works are matters

Digitized by v^,ooQle

GRATUITOUS PREACHING

207

of precept, but that some are works of counsel and supererogation,
and that such merit with God an illustrious crown of glory. So*
S. Chrysostom, Ambrose, S. Augustine {de Opere Monach, . c. 5), and
Bellarmine {de MonacJu lib. ii. c. 9).

The other Apostles, being full of zeal for God, would as well as
Paul have preached the Gospel freely, if they might thence have
hoped for a greater harvest of souls, and greater glory before God.
But this they might not hope for, for the faithful were generous to
them, and the Jews devoted to them, and of their own accord they
supplied their needs. Cf. Acts iv. 34. But Paul, as one outside
the order and number of the twelve Apostles, called to the aposto-
late after the death of Christ, had to gain a recognition of his
authority, and he judged it useful to that end that he should preach
the Gospel without charge. Moreover, the Corinthians, though rich,
were covetous; and, therefore, Paul preached freely to prevent
them from supposing that he sought their goods instead of them-
selves ; but from the more generous Thessalonians and Philippians
he accepted support. In short, Paul wished by this course of
action to shut the mouth of the Jews, who hated him, and of the
false Apostles. He says this indeed in 2 Cor. xi. 1 2.

That I abuse not my power in the Gospel That I may not
use my undoubted right and liberty to the detriment of the Gospel.
Not that it really is an abuse to receive money for preaching the
Gospel, but that it is the employment of a lesser good. Abuse is
used here for use to the full \ as it is in chap. vii. 31. Cf a similar use
of the word in S. Paulinus {Ep. ii.)

It may be said that Ambrose here understands the word to
mean literal abuse, which is sin, when he says : “They who use their
right, when it is inexpedient to do so, or when another suffers loss,
are guilty, and therefore sin." I reply that this is true when they
can easily give up their right, and when others suffer great loss by their
not yielding ; for charity then bids us give way. These conditions,
the Ambrosian commentary seems to think, existed with Paul and
the Corinthians.

But the opposite is far more true. It was a very difficult matter

Digitized by v^,ooQle

208 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

for the Apostle to yield his right of maintenance at the hands of the
Corinthians, because by so yielding he had to spend nights without
sleep, while he laboured with his hands to procure food for himself
and his companions; while the Corinthians, who were numerous
and rich, might easily have maintained him. Nor ought they to
have taken offence at this, for the other Apostles were maintained
by their flocks, and all law and reason say that he who labours for
another should be maintained by him. The Apostle, therefore,
wished to set a noble example of poverty, sincerity, and zeal, for the
greater commendation and spread of the faith among those who
were young in it, and the avaricious rich. But such a heroic work
as this is not a precept, but a counsel of charity. Therefore, in
the next verse, he says that in such matters he is free.

Ver. 19. — For though I be free from all men, yet have I made
myself servant unto all I humbled myself to all things, even to
want and hunger ; I accommodated myself to the weaknesses of all,
insomuch that, when I saw the Corinthians slow and niggardly in
their support of the Apostles, I refused to accept any payment from
them, that I might gain all by condescending to their infirmity.

Ver. 20. — To them that are under the law , as under the law . To
the Jews I became as one under the Mosaic law. This took place,
e.g., says (Ecumenius, when he circumcised Timothy, when, after
purifying himself, he went to the Temple, because he had a vow
(Acts xxi. 26).

Ver. 21. — To them that are without law , as without law . To
the Gentiles I became as though I followed nature only as my light
and leader, as the Gentiles do. So CEcumenius, Theophylact, and
Chrysostom.

Ver. 22. — I am made all things to all men. Not by acting deceit-
fully or sinfully, but through sympathy and compassion, which made
me suit myself to the dispositions of all men, so, as far as honesty
and God’s law allow, that I might be able to heal the indispositions
of all. Cf. S. Augustine (Epp. 9 and 19): “Not by lying, but by
sympathy; not by cunning craftiness, but by large-hearted com-
passion was Paul made all things to all men.”

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ALL THINGS TO ALL MEN

209

The Apostle does not sanction what men of the world wish for
and do, viz., the accommodating ourselves through right and wrong
to all men, feigning to be heretics with heretics, Turks with Turks,
pure with the pure, and unclean with those that are unclean. This
he condemns (Gal. ii. 11 etseq.). The advice of S. Ephrem ( Attende
tibij c. 10) is sound : “ Have charity with all and abstain from all ;”
and again the apophthegm of S. Bernard, which embraces every
virtue : “Live so as to be prudent for yourself useful to others, pleasing
to God.” S. Jordan, S. Dominick successor in the Generalship of
the Order, used to say, as his life relates : " Jf I had devoted myself
as closely to any branch of learning as I have to that sentence of S.
Pauls, ‘ I am made all things to all men ,* I should be most learned
and eminent in it. Throughout the whole of my life I have studied to
accommodate myself to every one : to the soldier I was as a soldier , to
the nobleman as a nobleman , to the plebeian as a plebeian ; and thus
I always endeavoured to do them good in this way , while on the watch
that I did not lose or hurt my soul while benefiting them.”

Ver. 23. — And this I do for the gospels sake , that I might be
partaker thereof with you. That I may with other preachers receive,
in due time, fruit of the Gospel that I have preached. The Greek
denotes a partaker with others. Hence in the second place Chry-
sostom understands “partaker thereof” to mean a fellow-sharer of
the faithful in the Gospel, i.e., of the crowns laid up for the faithful.
And Chrysostom rightly points to the wonderful humility of Paul,
in putting himself on a level with even ordinary Christians, when he
had surpassed not only the faithful, but all the other Apostles in his
labours for the Gospel. Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10.

Ver. 24. — Know ye not that they which run in a race run all \ but
one receiveth the prize ? For this I preach the Gospel without charge ,
for this I am made all things to all men ; for this I labour, that I may
obtain that best prize of ail, given to those who run in this race.

As it is in a race, so is it in the Christian course : it is not all
that run that receive the prize, but those only that run well and
duly reach the appointed goal. I say duly, or according to the

laws of the course which Christ the Judge has laid down for those
vol 1. o

Digitized by v^,ooQle

210 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

that run, and according to which He has promised the prize to those
that run well When, therefore, one is mentioned, more are not
excluded. For the Apostle does not mean to say, as Chrysostom
well remarks, that only one Christian surpasses the rest, and is
more zealous of good works, and will receive the prize; for a
similitude does not hold good in all points, but only in that one
which is expressed. The comparison here is that, as in a race he who
runs well receives the prize, so in Christianity he who runs well
will receive a crown of glory. And this is evident from what is
added, “So run that ye may obtain ,” t.e., not one, but each one.
Moreover, in a race it is often not only the first, but the second,
third, or fourth who also receives a prize.

Still the Apostle says one, not three or four, because he is chiefly
looking at that glory and superexcellent reward given, not to all
the elect, but to those few heroic souls that follow, not only the
precepts, but also the counsels of Christ For he is looking to the
prize which he is expecting for himself, in having been the only
Apostle to preach the Gospel without charge, in having surpassed
all the other Apostles in the greatness of his labour and his charity,
in having become all things to all men. He says in effect: O
Christians, do not merely run duly, that ye may obtain, but run
most well and most swiftly, that you may carry off the first and
most splendid prize of glory. It is a sluggish soul that says, “It
is enough for me to be saved and reach heaven.” For each one,
says Chrysostom, ought to strive to be first in heaven, and receive
the first prize there.

Some understand this passage to refer to the mansions or crowns
and prizes prepared for each of the elect, and would read it, “ Let
each so run that he may obtain his prize.” But this explanation is
more acute than simple.

Anselm again takes it a little differently. Heathens, heretics,
reprobates, he says, run, but the one people of elect Christians
receives the prize. But the Apostle is speaking to Christians only
as running, and he urges them to so run that they may obtain the
prize to which they are called by the Gospel of Christ

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CHRISTIAN RACE

21 1

So run that ye may obtain. I.e., obtain the crown of glory and
the prize of victory. The allusion is to those that ran in the public
games for a crown as the prize, with which they were crowned when
victorious. Cf. notes to Rev. iii. 2. The word so denotes the recti-
tude, the diligence, the swiftness, and the perseverance especially re-
quired in order to win the prize. The course of Christ was marked by
these qualities, that course which all ought to put before themselves
for imitation. S. Bernard {Ep. 254) says: “ The Creator Himself of
man and of the worlds did He , while He dwelt here below with men ,
stand still ? Nay , as the Scripture testifies , ‘ He went about doing good
and healing all .' He went through the world not un fruit fully, care-
lessly y lazily , or with laggard step , but so as it was written of Him ,
1 He rejoiced as a giant to run his course .' No one catches the runner
but he that runs equally fast; and what avails it to stretch out after
Christ if you do not lay hold of Him ? Therefore is it that Paul said,
* So run that ye may obtain There , 0 Christian , set the goal of your
course and your journeying where Christ placed His . 1 He was made
obedient unto death.' However long then you may have run, you will
not obtain the prize if you do not persevere even unto death. The prize
is Christ." He then goes on to point out that in the race of virtue
not to run, to stand still, is to fail and go back. “ But if while He
runs you stand still, you come no nearer to Christ , nay, you recede from
Him, and should fear for yourself what David said, * Lo , they that
are far from Thee shall perish.' Therefore, if to go forward is to
run, when you cease to go forward you cease to run : when you are not
running you begin to go back. Hence we may plainly see that not
to wish to go forward is nothing but to go back. Jacob saw a ladder,
and on the ladder angels, where none was sitting down, none standing
still ; but all seemed to be either ascending or descending, that we might
be plainly given to understand that in this mortal course no mean is to be
found between going forward and going back, but that in the same way
as our bodies are known to be continuously either increasing or decreas-
ing, so must our spirit be always either going forward or going back."

Ver. 25. — And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate
in all things. Every wrestler, &c., refrains from everything that may

Digitized by v^,ooQle

212

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

endanger his success, i. The allusion is to the Isthmian games,
celebrated at Corinth in honour of Neptune and Palaemon, in which
the victor was crowned with a pine-wreath. Of these games the
poet Archias thus sings : —

“ Four Argive towns the sacred contests see.

And two to men, and two to gods belong ;

Tove gives the olive, Phoebus sunny fruit,

Palaemon poppy, and Archemorus the pine.”

2. There is consequently an allusion also to the athletes, the
wrestlers, and boxers, who fought with their fists ; to the runners,
who strove for the prize for speed ; to all who contested, whether
with hand, or foot, or the whole body, for the prize.

3. Ail these abstained from luxurious living, and only lived on
the necessities of life. This is what the Apostle alludes to when
he says, is temperate in all things. Clement of Alexandria (Strom.
lib. iil), following Plato (de Leg. lib. viii.), adds that they also re-
frained from all sexual intercourse. For as lust weakens, enervates,
and exhausts the body, so do continence and chastity strengthen
the body, and much more the mind. S. Ephrem, too, in his
tractate on the words, “ It is better to marry than to bum,” explains
this abstinence from all things spoken of here to be abstinence
from all lust.

4. The course is this present life, or each one’s state in the
Church, and especially that of an evangelist ; the runner or wrestler
is each Christian. Hence, S. Dionysius (de Eccles. Hierarch, cvii.)
says that those who are baptized are anointed with oil, that they
may understand that by this sign they are anointed to be Christ’s
athletes, and are consequently called to fight a holy fight for faith
and godliness. He adds that it is the practice, too, to anoint them
when dead, as athletes perfected by death. He says : “ The first
anointing called him to a holy fight ; the second shows that he has
finished his course and been perfected by death.”

5. In this course and contest the antagonist is the world, the
flesh, and the devil; the athlete’s diet is moderate food tempered

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE RULES OF THE COURSE

213

with fasting ; the fight consists in the castigation of the body, and
all the arduous offices of virtue, which are accomplished with a
conflict, whether external or internal especially is the preaching
and spreading of the Gospel such a fight ; and from such arises the
victory over the world, the flesh, and the devil. The prize is the
incorruptible crown of eternal glory for which Paul expresses his
longing in 2 Tim. iv. 8. The punishment inflicted on the con-
quered is rejection and eternal confusion (ver. 27). As the athlete,
by abstinence, exercise, and toil, subdues and exercises his body,
and prepares it for the race-course or the contest, that he may
conquer by lawful and generous effort, and may obtain a corruptible
crown, so much more to obtain the eternal crown do we Christians,
and especially I, your Apostle, keep under and exercise my body
by fasting, labour, and weariness, and so much more severely do
I, as an athlete in the Divine contest, exact from myself all the
offices of those that fight. I do this, lest my body lose the strength
derived from continency and a hard life by luxurious living, and
then dwindle down into the helplessness of a self-indulgent life.
But as I have to fight against the world, the flesh, and the devil,
let me rather imitate the athletes, and so conquer and be crowned.
Come, then, O Corinthians, run with me in this course ; abstain not
only from things offered to idols, because of scandal, but also from
luxuries — from wine and lust — that you may gain the victory and
carry off the prize. This exhortation to abstinence was occasioned
by the question of idol- sacrifices, as I said at the beginning of
chapter viii.

Epaminondas, leader of the Thebans, having fought most bravely
in battle, and being wounded, even to death, asked, as he was
dying, whether his shield were safe and the enemy slain ; and when
they answered “Yes” to both questions, he said : “Now is the end
of my life ; but a better and higher beginning is at hand : now is
Epaminondas being born in so dying.” So Valerius Maximus
relates. If Epaminondas so strove for a temporal victory, for praise
and glory that are evanescent, and died so joyfully and gloriously
what shall the soldier of Christ do for the crown that fadeth not

Digitized by v^,ooQle

214 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

away, for the glory that knows no ending? Tertullian (ad Martyres,
c. iv.) says excellently : “ Jf earthly glories can so overcome bodily and
mental delights as to throw contempt on the sword, fire, crucifixion ,
wild beasts , and torments , in order to obtain the reward of human
praise , I may well say that these sufferings are but little to undergo to
obtain the glories of heaven . Is glass worth as much as true pearls ?
Who therefore would not most joyfully suffer for the true glory as
much as others suffer for the false ? ”

Virgil says of Junius Brutus, who ordered his sons to be put to
death for conspiring against the Romans with the Tarquins —

“ The love of Rome him mastered with boundless thirst for praise ; ”
so we may say of the Christian —

“The love of Christ will conquer, and heaven’s unquenchable thirst. ”

Listen to what S. Chrysostom says (de Martyr . vol. iii.) : “ You are
but a feather-bed soldier if you think that you can conquer without a
fight, triumph without a battle. Exert your strength, fight strenuously,
strive to the death in this battle . Look at the covenant, attend to the
conditions, know the warfare — the covenant that you have entered
into, the conditions on which you have enrolled yourself, the warfare
into which you have thrown yourself I

It is clear from this, says S. Chrysostom, that faith alone is not
sufficient for salvation, but that works also are requisite, and heroic
efforts, and especially no small abstinence from all the allurements
of the world. For, as S. Jerome says (Ep. 34 ad Julian ): “It is
difficult, nay, it is impossible for any one to enjoy both the present and
the future, to fill here his belly and there his sold, to pass from one
delight to the other, to show himself glorious both in heaven and in
earth ”

S. Augustine piously consoles and animates Christ’s athletes by
reminding them of the help that God gives (Serm. 105). He says :
“He who ordered the strife helps them that strive . God does not

look upon you in your contest as the spectators do on the aildete : for
the populace warms him by shouts, but cannot lend him any help . He

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SELF-DISCIPLINE

215

who arranged the contest can provide the crown , but cannot lend
strength; but God , when He sees His servants striving, helps them
when they call upon Him , . dor it is the voice of the combatant himself
in Psalm xciv. 18, who says, ‘ When I said, my foot slippeth. Thy
mercy, O Lord, held me up? ” S. Dionysius too (de EccL Hier. cii.)
says : “ To them that strive the Lord promises crowns as God. He
has laid down the rules of the contest by His wisdom. He has
appointed rewards most fair and beautiful for the conquerors ; and,
what is surely more Divine, He Himself, as supreme loving-kindness
and goodness, conquers in His warriors ; and while He indwells
within them , He fights for their safety and victory against the forces
of death and corruption .”

Ver. 2 6 . — So fight I, not as one that beateth the air. The com-
parison is still maintained. I fight as an athlete, but I do not spend
my toil for nought, but I wound my enemy, i.e., I subdue my body
and my flesh ; and when I have subdued this foe, the remaining
two, the world and the devil, are easily overcome. For the world
and the devil cannot kill us, wound us, strike us, tempt us, approach
us, except through the body and its organs, the eyes and ears and
tongue and other members.

Ver. 27 . — But I keep under my body and bring it into subjection.
I keep under means, says S. Ambrose, “ I repress it by fastings ; ” “I
wound it with stripes,” says S. Basil (de Virginitate) ; “ I starve it,”
says Origen. S. Augustine (de Utilit. Jejun.) says 2 “ The devil often
takes it upon him to protect the flesh against the soul, and to say, * Why
do you thus fasti— you are laying up punishment in store for yourself,
you are your own torturer and murderer? Answer him, ' I keep it
under, lest this beast of burden throw me headlong? ” For our flesh is
the devil’s instrument \ it is, says S. Bernard, “ the snare of the devil ”
( Serm . 8 in Ps. xci.). Erasmus, following Theophylact and Paulinus
(Ep. 58 ad. Aug.), renders the Greek verb, “ I make it black and
blue,” or “ I make the eyes of a black and bloody colour.” This last
is, as Hesychius and Suidas say, the literal rendering of the word.
But all others in general take the word to mean subdue, coerce,
bruise. Castigate in the Latin, or “keep under,” as the text, suits

Digitized by v^,ooQle

216 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

both renderings, but the second is better, as being at once plainer
and more near to the Greek — taking to be synonymous

with v7ro7rwfft).

This keeping under or castigation of the body is effected by
fastings, hair-shirts, humiliations, scourgings, and other mortifica-
tions of the flesh. Hence some think that Paul was in the habit of
scourging his body. This is certainly the literal meaning of the
Greek, which is rendered by Beza, Melancthon, Castalion, and Henry
Stephen " bruise.” But a bruise is not caused except by a blow,
whether from a stick, or a scourge, or some other instrument More-
over, fasting (which some, as, e.g. f Ambrose, Gregory, and Chrysostom,
think was Paul’s discipline) is not so much a strife and contest as
a preparation for them ; for of it he has already said, “ Every man
that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things .” Cf. also
Jacob Gretser (de Discipl lib. i. c. 4).

Moreover, as Anselm remarks, as well as Gregory, in a passage
to be quoted directly, the Apostle, while he keeps under and scourges
his body, at the same time scourges and wounds the devil, his
antagonist, who is in alliance with our carnal concupiscence, and lies
in hiding within the foul jungle of the flesh, and through it tempts
and attacks us.

Lest I myself should be a castaway . Lest I be a reprobate

from God and excluded from heaven. Maldonatus (Note Alanusc.)
learnedly says that, as the comparison is still with the arena, a
castaway here is one who is conquered in the fight; and that S.
Paul’s meaning is, “ Lest while I teach others to conquer I myself
be conquered.” The Apostle is speaking not of eternal reproba-
tion, which is in the mind of God, but of that temporal reprobation
which is the execution of the eternal. He is referring to Jer. vi.
30 : “ Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath
rejected them.”

1. Hence it is clear that the Apostle is not speaking (as in
2 Cor. xiii. 7), as some think, of the reprobation of men, as if his
meaning were, “ What I preach that I practise : I do not fare sump-
tuously, but I keep under my body, lest I be a castaway and reprobate

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SUBJECTION OF THE BODY

217

of men, and regarded as one not doing what he teaches.” For
Jeremiah clearly speaks of God’s rejection, not men’s; and reproba-
tion and reprobate always refer to this when they are spoken of
absolutely, and not restricted* to men, as they are restricted in 2
Cor. xiii. 7. Hence appears the uncertainty to us of grace and pre-
destination. Paul feared being condemned, and will you believe
that your faith cannot but save you ?

2. It also follows that Paul had no revelation of his salvation.
Cf. S. Gregory (lib. vi. Ep. 22, ad Gregoriam).

3. And that he was not so strong in grace but that he might fall
from it.

From this passage, it is evident that the Christian’s fight con-
sists especially in bringing the body into subjection. For this foe is
an inward foe, and one most hard to withstand, and therefore the
snares of the flesh are to be dreaded more than all others. We
ought also to get ourselves ready for this fight by the athlete’s
training, that is, by temperance, and in this temperance we should
begin the fight, and in it daily increase, grow strong, and come to
perfection. The Christian, therefore, must begin with conquering
gluttony. When that is done, it will be easier for him to conquer
other vices, as Cassianus and others say. Hence it appears that
the Christian fighter must keep under his body, lest its lusts make
him a castaway ; and that, therefore, bodily mortification, by watch-
ings, fastings, and other afflictions, is the right way to salvation, and
is the most suitable instrument for perfecting virtue, and for the
complete subdual of vices, if it be done with discretion, and in
proportion to one’s strength and health. Cf. S. Thomas (ii. ii. qu.
188, art 7).

But let us hear what the ancient doctors of the Church have to
say on this head. Ambrose (Ep. ad Eccl Vercell.) says : “ I hear
that there are men who say that there is no merit in fasting , ; and who
scoff at those who mortify their fleshy that they may subdue it to the
mind. This S. Paul would never have done or said if he had thought
it folly ” (let our Protestant friends observe this); “ for he says, as
though boasting, s I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest

Digitized by v^,ooQle

218 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

that by any means , when I have preached to others , I myself shouLl be
a castaway Therefore , who do not mortify their body , Z0&?

to preach to others , themselves regarded as reprobates .

school has sent forth these Epicureans to preach pleasure and
advise luxury ? The Lord Jesus , wishing to strengthen us against the
temptations of the devil \ fasted before He strove with him , that we
might know that we cannot in any other way overcome the blandish-
ments of the evil one . Let these men say why Christ fasted if it were
not to give us an example to do likewise

S. Gregory ( Morals , lib. xxx. c 26) says : “ JVebuzaradan, the chief
of the cooks, destroyed the walls of Jerusalem as he destroys the virtues
of the soul when the belly is not kept in check. Hence it is that Paul
took away his power from the chief of the cooks , /.<?., the belly , in its
assault on the walls of Jerusalemy when he said, 1 1 keep under my
body and bring it into subjection Hence it is that he had said just
before } 1 So fight I y not as one that beateth the air.* When we restrain
the fleshy it is not the air but the unclean spirits that we wound with
the blows of our abstinence ; and in subduing what is within we deal
blows to the foes without. Hence is it that, when the King of Babylon
orders the furnace to be heatedy he has a heap of tow and pitch thrown
into ity but nevertheless the fire has no power over the children of
abstinence ; for though our old enemy put before our eyes a countless
number of delicacies to increase the fire of our lusty yet the grace of
the Spirit from on high whispers to us , bidding us stand our ground \
untouched by the burning lusts of the flesh. n

S. Basil (Horn, de Legend. Gen til. Libris) says': “ The body must
be mortified and kept in check like a wild beasty and the passions that
take their rise from it to the souFs hurt must be kept in order by the
scourge reason , lest by giving free rein to pleasure the mind become
like a driver of restive and unbroken horsesy and be run away with
and lost. Amongst other sayings there is one of Pythagoras which
deserves to be remembered. When he saw a certain man looking after
himself with great care, and fattening himself by sumptuous living and
exercise y he said: * Unhappy man / you are ever engaged in building
for yourself a worse and worse prison / ’ It is said too of Plato, that

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MORTIFICATION OF THE BODY

219

owing to his vivid realisation of the harm that arises from the body *
he fixed his Academy at Athens in an unhealthy spot, that he might
reduce the excessive prosperity of the body , as a gardener prunes a vine
whose boughs stretch too far . I too have often heard physicians say
that extremely good health is fallacious . Since , therefore , care for the
body seems to be harmful to body and soul alike, to hug this burden
and to be a slave to it is evident proof of madness. But if we study to
despise it, we shall not easily lose ourselves in admiration of anything
human? S. Basil again (in Beg. Fusius Z)isp. Beg. 17) says : “As a
muscular build and good complexion put a stamp of superiority on the
athlete, so is the Christian distinguished from others by bodily emacia-
tion and pallid complexion , which are ever the companions of abstinence.
He is thereby proved to be a wrestler indeed, following the commands
of Christ, and in weakness of body he lays his adversary low on the
ground, and shows how powerful he is in the contests of godliness
according to the words, 1 When lam weak, then am I strong?”

S. Chrysostom says here i “ ‘ I mortify my body * means that I
undergo much labour to live temperately. Although desire is intract-
able, the belly clamorous, yet I rein them in, and do not surrender
myself to my passions, but repress them, and with wearisome effort
bring under nature herself I say this that no one may lose heart in
his struggle for virtue, for it is an arduous fight. Wherefore he says,

* / keep under my body and bring it into subjection He did not say,

* I destroy and punish it,' for the flesh is not an enemy, but 1 1 keep it
under and bring it into subjection because it is the property of my
Lord , not of an enemy ; of a trainer, not a foe ; ‘ lest by any means,
when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway Jf
Paul feared this, being such a teacher as he was ; if he had any dread,
after having preached to the whole world, what are we to say ? ”

S. Jerome, writing against Jovinian, a heretic, an opponent of
fasting, of chastity, and asceticism, ably defends these duties, and
about the end of lib. iL he says : “ The fact that many agree with
your opinions is a mark of luxuriousness ; and you think it adds to
your reputation for wisdom to have more pigs running after you to be
fed with the food or the flames of hell. Basilides, a teacher of luxury

Digitized by v^,ooQle

220 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. IX.

and filthy practices , has after these many years now been transformed
into Jovinian , as into Euphorbus , that the Latin race might know his
heresy . It was the banner of the Cross and the severity of preaching"
(let the Protestants mark this) “ which destroyed the idol-temples *. /«-
purity , gluttony , and drunkenness are endeavouring to overthrow the
fortitude taught by the Cross . prophets always promise pleasant

things , fo/ satisfaction. Truth is bitter , and those

who preach it are filled with bitterness .”

Cassianus (de Instit. Renunt. lib. v. c. xvii. et seq.) says : “ Do you
want to listen to the true athlete of Christ striving according to the
lawful rules of the contest t He says , * / therefore so run not as uncer-
tainly ; so fight Ij not as one that beateth the air , but I keep under my
body and bring it into subjection , lest when I have preached to others I
myself should be a castaway l Seest thou how he has placed in himself
that is in his fleshy the hottest part of the battle , and has thus put it on
a firm base , and how he has made the fight consist in simple bodily
mortification and in the subjection of his flesh ? ” And then a little
afterwards he repeats these words of the Apostle, and adds : “ This
properly has to do with the sufferings of continence , and bodily fasting ,
and mortification of the flesh. He describes himself as a strenuous
combatant of the flesh, and points out that the blows of abstinence that
he directs against it are not in vain, but that he has gained a triumph
by mortifying his body . That body, having been punished by the blows
of continence and wounded by the bruises of fastings , has given to the
victorious spirit the crown of immortality and the palm that never fadeth.
... So fights he by fastings and affliction of the flesh, not as one that
beateth the air, Le., that deals in vain the blows of continence ; but he
wounds the spirits who dwell in the air, by mortifying his body. For
he that says, € not as one that beateth the air, 9 declares that he strikes
some one that is in the air ”

Further, not only for the sake of lust, but to subdue pride and
break down all vices, and to cultivate every virtue, the body must
be mortified, as S. Jerome says (Ep. 14 ad Celantiam ) : “ They who
are taught by experience and knowledge to hold fast the virtue of absti-
nence mortify their flesh to break the souls pride, in order that so

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MORTIFICATION OF THE BODY

221

they may descend from the pinnacle of their haughty arrogance to fulfil
the will of Gody which is most perfectly fulfilled in humility. Therefore
do they withdraw their mind from hankering after variety of foodsy
that they may devote all their strength to the pursuit of virtue. By
degrees the flesh feels less and less the burden of fastingSy as the soul
more hungers after righteousness. For that chosen vessel \ Pauly in
mortifying his body and bringing it into subjection was not seeking
after chastity aloney as some ignorant persons suppose : for fasting helps
not only this virtue but every virtue .”

Lastly, the holy hermits of old, in their zeal after perfection, morti-
fied their bodies to a degree that seems incredible. And that this
was pleasing to God is seen from the holiness, the happiness, and
the length of their lives. We may read for this Jerome, in his life
of S. Hilarion, S. Paul, S. Malchus; Athanasius in his life of S.
Antony ; Theodoret in his life of S. Simeon Stylites, who for eighty
years stood under the open sky night and day, hardly taking food
or sleep. Sagacious men have observed in their lives of the Saints
that scarcely any Saints have been illustrious for their miracles and
for their actions but such as were eminent for their fastings and
asceticism, or who afflicted their bodies, or were afflicted by God
with diseases, or by enemies and tyrants with tortures and troubles ;
that other Saints, who led an ordinary life, were of great benefit to
the Church, but seldom if ever performed any miracles.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER X

I The sacraments of the Jews 6 are types of ours , 7 and their punishments \ 1 1
examples for us. 14 We must fly prom idolatry. 21 We must not make the
Lords table the table of devils : 24 and in things indifferent we must have
regard of our brethren.

M OREOVER, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that
all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea ;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea ;

3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat ;

4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink : for they drank of that spiritual
Rock that followed them : and that Rock was Christ.

5 But with many of them God was not well pleased : for they were overthrown
in the wilderness.

6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after
evil things, as they also lusted.

7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them ; as it is written, The people
sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.

8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in
one day three and twenty thousand.

9 Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also templed, and were
destroyed of serpents.

10 Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed
of the destroyer.

1 1 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples : and they are
written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man : but
God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able ;
but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to
bear it.

14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

15 I speak as to wise men ; judge ye what I say.

16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood
of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of
Christ?

17 For we being many are one bread, and one body : for we are all partakers
of that one bread.

18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices
partakers of the altar ?

19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in
sacrifice to idols is any thing ?

S22

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER X,

223

20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to
devils, and not to God : and I would not that ye should have fellowship with
devils.

21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils : ye cannot be
partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.

22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?

23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient : all things are
lawful for me, but all things edify not.

24 Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth,

25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for
conscience sake :

26 For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.

27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast> and ye be disposed to go ;
whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not
for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake : for the earth is the Lord’s,
and the fulness thereof :

29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other : for why is my liberty
judged of another man's conscience ?

30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which
I give thanks ?

31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory
of God.

32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the
church of God :

33 Even as I please all men in all things , not seeking mine own profit, but the
profit of many, that they may be saved.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

From speaking of the contest, in which those who deny themselves and strive
lawfully are rewarded, and in which the slothful and self-indulgent are condemned
and put to confusion, of which the Apostle treated at the end of the preceding
chapter, he goes on to the manners of the Hebrews of old, their lusts and vices,
especially idolatry, its punishment and condemnation, that by such examples he
may teach the Corinthians how vices and temptations, and especially idolatry, are
to be guarded against.

Consequently, in ver. 18 he descends and returns to things offered to idols,
and answers a question concerning them which had been broached in chapter
viii. And —

i. He lays down that it is not lawful for them to eat of things in so far as

they are offered to idols ; for this would be to give consent to the
sacrifice, and to profess idol worship.

ii. In ver. 22 he points out that it is not lawful to eat of them when the

weaker brethren are offended at it Hence in ver. 31 he recommends
to the Corinthians edifying above everything, and bids them do every-
thing to the glory of God and the salvation of their neighbours.

Digitized by t^ooQle

224 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

Ver. i. — Moreover , brethren , I would not that ye should be ignorant
how that all our fathers were under the cloud \ The particle for gives
the cause of what was said at the end of the preceding chapter.
He means, I have said that Christians must strive after baptism in
their contest, lest they become reprobates and lose the prize, as the
Hebrews, after their typical baptism and heavenly food, lost sloth-
fully through their sins the land of promise, their prize, so that out
of 600,000, Joshua and Caleb alone entered the Promised Land. So
do you, O Corinthians, take care, lest, through your sloth, and a
life out of harmony with your faith and baptism, you be excluded
from heaven. So Chysostom and Anselm. The argument is from
the type or figure to the thing prefigured.

Our fathers , i.e. 9 the fathers of the Jews, of whom I am one, as
many of you are, O Corinthians.

Under the cloud. This cloud was the pillar which overshadowed
the Hebrews in the daytime as a cloud, and shone at night as a
fire, which led them for forty years through the wilderness, which
settled over the ark and went before their camp, and protected them
from the heat by spreading itself over the camp. Its mover and
charioteer, so to speak, was an angel. See Exod. xiii.

And all passed through the sea. The Red Sea, and dry shod, be-
cause Moses smote the waters with his rod, and divided them.

Ver. 2. — And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in
the sea. See Exod. xiv. The passage of the Red Sea is a type of
baptism, in which we are reddened with the blood of Christ, and
drown the Egyptians, viz., our sins. Moses is a type of Christ ; the
cloud is the Holy Spirit, who cools the heat of lust and gives us
light. Theodoret says : “ Those things were typical of ours. The
sea stood for the font , the cloud for the grace of the Spirit , Moses for
the priesty his rod for the Cross. Israel signified those who were
baptized; the persecuting Egyptians represented the devils y and Pharaoh
himself was their chief.”

Unto Moses as the legislator signifies, according to some, that the
Hebrews were initiated into the Mosaic law by a kind of baptism
when they passed through the sea. So we are baptized into Christ

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE RED SEA BAPTISM

225

or initiated and incorporated into Christ and Christianity, by baptism
Hence in Exod. xiv., after the account of the passage through the
sea, it is added, “They believed the Lord and His servant Moses.”
But our baptism was not a type of the baptism of the Heb*
rews in the Red Sea, but, on the contrary, theirs was a type of ours.
Moreover, in this passage the Hebrews were not initiated into the
law of Moses, for they did not receive it till they reached Sinai.

I say, then, that since the Apostle frequently puts into for in, it is
more simple to understand the phrase to mean through Moses, or
under his leadership. So Ephrem, Chrysostom, Theophylact take
it. The sense, then, is : All the Hebrews were baptized by Moses
spiritually and typically, or bore the type of our baptism, in that,
when they saw the sea divided by Moses, and Moses passing
through it before, they, as Chrysostom says, also ventured to trust
themselves to the sea, and that in the cloud, that is, under the
guidance and protection of the cloud going before them, and in the
sea , viz., in which the Egyptians were drowned, and through which
they passed from Egyptian slavery to liberty and newness of life, just
as we pass through the waters of baptism from the service of the
devil to the Kingdom of Christ So Anselm, Chrysostom, Ambrose,
Theophylact.

Notice, too, with Chrysostom, that the Scriptures give the name
of the type to the antitype, and vice versd . Here the passage

through the Red Sea is called a baptism, because it was a type of
one. Hence ver. 6 is explained, where he says, “These things
were our examples.”

Ver. 3. — And did all eat the same spiritual meat Not, as Calvin
supposes, the same as we, as though Christians and Hebrews alike
feed, not on the Real Body of Christ, but on the typical
You will say, perhaps, that S. Augustine {tract. 25 in Johan.)
and S. Thomas explain it to be the same as we eat. I reply:
They understand " the same ” by analogy, for the Hebrews received
typically what we receive really. But this is beside the meaning
of the Apostle, who understands the same to refer, not to us but to

themselves. All the Hebrews, whether good or bad, ate the same
vol. 1. p

Digitized by v^,ooQle

226 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

food, that is the same manna. This is evident from the context,
“But with many of them God was not well pleased f that is to say,
that though all ate the same manna, drank of the same water from
the rock, yet all did not please God. As, then, they had one bap-
tism and one spiritual food, so too have we ; and as, notwithstanding,
they were not all saved, but many of them perished, so is it to
be feared that many of us may perish, although we have the same
sacraments common to us all. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm,
and others. And notice with them that manna is here called
“spiritual food,” or mystical, or typical, because the manna was a type
of the Eucharist. So the water from the rock is called “ spiritual
drink," because it was a type of the blood of Christ Others take
“spiritual" to mean miraculous, t'.e., not produced by the powers of
nature but of spirits, viz., God and the angels; for of this kind
was manna, of which the Psalmist says, “ So man did eat angels’
food” (Ps. lxxviii. 25).

1. Manna allegorically stood for Christ in the Blessed Sacrament,
as is evident from S. John vL 49, 50. Especially did it represent
the contained part, and the effect of the sacrament, as Chrysostom,
Theophylact, and Cyril point out at length, in commenting on the
passage of S. John just quoted. Hence the Apostle says here:
“They did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the
same spiritual drink.” Even Calvin takes this of the Holy Com-
munion, and says that the manna was a type of the body of Christ.
From this you may rightly infer that in the Blessed Sacrament the
flesh of Christ is truly present, since manna was a symbol of a thing
really existing, and not merely imagined; for some of us as well
as of the Jews will eat the spiritual meat, />., the typical and sym-
bolical flesh, and will not have more of the truth signified than the
Jews, nay, much less; for manna was sweeter than our bread, and
far more clearly than dry bread represented the body of Christ A
certain minister of this new flock has lately yielded this point as a
clear consequence. But who does not see that it is at variance with
Holy Scripture and with reason ? For the New Law is more excel-
lent than the Old, and therefore the sacraments of the New surpass

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MANNA AS A TYPE

22 /

those of the Old. Therefore the Apostle says : “ These things were
our examples.” But the thing figured is better than the figure, as a
body is than its shadow, and a man than his likeness. Therefore
the sacraments of the New Law, and especially the Eucharist, as a
thing figured, must be more noble than the sacraments of the Old
Law, and than the manna itself, which was but a type and figure of
our Eucharist Again, in S. John vi., Christ at some length puts
His body in the Eucharist before the manna (vers. 48 and 59).
The bread that He there speaks of is that which is Divine, conse-
crated and transubstantiated into the body of Christ. Who does
not see that the manna was a better representation of the body of
Christ than bread ? It can be shown in many ways.

2. S. Paul has most fittingly compared manna to the body of
Christ in the Eucharist, and has most beautifully shadowed it out :
(a) The element in the Eucharist and the manna have the same
colour ; (£) the taste of both is sweet ; (c) it is not found except by
those who have left the fleshpots of Egypt and the lusts of the flesh ;
(tf) to the covetous and to infidels both turn to worms and bring
condemnation ; ( e ) the manna was not given till after the passing
of the Red Sea — the Eucharist is not given till after baptism ;
(J) after the manna came, the Hebrews fought with Araalek, but
before that God alone had fought for them against the Egyptians.
They fought and conquered ; so the obstacles and temptations which
beset the heavenly life are allowed by God to trouble those only
who are fortified against them, and they are overcome by the power
of the Eucharist (g) The manna was bread made by angels, with-
out seed, or ploughing, or any human toil ; so the body of Christ
was formed of the Virgin alone by the overshadowing of the Holy
Spirit. (^) Manna gave every kind of sweet taste to those who were
good and devout Hence Wisdom (xvi. 20) says of manna: “Thou
feddest Thine own people with angels* food, and didst give them
bread from heaven prepared without labour, containing in itself ail
sweetness and every pleasant taste.” So Christ is milk to babes, oil
to children, solid food to the perfect, as Gregory Nyssen says, (j) The
manna was small : Christ is contained by a small Host ; (£) the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

228 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

manna was beaten in a mortar : Christ was stripped of His mortality
in the mortar of the Cross. (/) The faithful wonderingly exclaim,
“Man-hu — What is this — that God should be with us!” (m) All
collected an equal measure of manna, viz., one omer ; so all alike
receive whole Christ, though the species or the Host be greater
or smaller, as Rupert says. ( n ) The manna was collected in the
wilderness on the six week-days only; so in our eternal Sabbath
and Promised Land the veil of the sacrament will be done away,
and in perfect rest we shall enjoy the sight of Christ face to face.
( o ) The manna melted under the sun, so is the sacrament dissolved
when the species are melted by heat. More will be found in the
commentary on Exod. xxi.

Ver. 4. — For they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them .
The rock which gave water to the Hebrews was a type of Christ,
who is the true Rock from which flowed the blood to quench the
heat of our lust. But what is meant by saying that this rock
followed the Hebrews ?

1. The Hebrews reply that their tradition, and the Chaldean
rendering of Num. xxi. 16, is that this rock miraculously followed
the Jews everywhere in the wilderness till they came to Canaan, and
supplied them with water. Hence Ephrem renders this, “ They
drank of the spiritual rock which came with them;” and Tertullian
(de Baptismo , c. ix.) calls this rock their “ companion.” He says :
“ This is the water which flowed from the rock which accompanied the
people” But farther on he interprets this rock of Christ, who in
His Godhead accompanied and led the Hebrews through the wilder-
ness. He says again ( contra Mar cion, lib. iii. c. 5 ) : “He will under-
stand that the rock which accompanied them to supply them with drink
was Christ” S. Ambrose, too (in Ps. xxxviii.) says : " There is a
shadow in the rock which poured forth water and followed the people.
Was not the water from the rock a shadow of the blood of Christy who
followed the people , though they fled from Him, that He might give
them drink and quench their thirst ', that they might be redeemed and
not perish f ” Again, S. Ambrose (de Sacra mentis, lib. v. c. 1) takes
the rock to be Christ He says : “ It was no motionless rock which

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THAT ROCK WAS CHRIST

229

followed the people . Drink , that Christ may follow Thee also” But
I should like to have better authorities for this tradition, for it is
against it that after this water came from the rock (Num. xx. n),
the people murmured again because of the scarcity of water (Num.
xxi. 5), and therefore God gave them a well of water (ver. 16).

2. Others soften down the passage and explain it thus : “ The
waters which burst forth from the rock flowed for a long time and
rushed forth as a torrent, and this stream followed the Hebrews till
they came to a place where there was plenty of water. For had it
been a supply to last but for one day, the rock would have had to
be struck on the next day, and the third, and the fourth, and so on,
to get a supply of water.” And this explanation they support
by pointing out that the manna is literal manna, and that there-
fore the rock or the drink spoken are material rock and material
drink ; but the objections to the first explanation are equally strong
against this.

3. Photius supposes that the word for following simply means
serving, and he would paraphrase the verse, “This rock satisfied the
thirst of the Hebrews.” But the Greek cannot possibly bear this
interpretation.

4. It is better, then, to understand this of the spiritual Rock
signified, not the one signifying. The meaning is then : By the
power of the Godhead of Christ, which was the spiritual Rock
signified by the rock that gave water to the Hebrews, and which
was their constant companion in the wilderness, water was given to
them from the material rock. It is so explained by S. Chrysostom,
Ambrose, Anselm, (Ecumenius.

It may be said, By “ spiritual meat ” the Apostle meant manna,
not the body of Christ, and by “spiritual drink” he means the
water signifying the blood of Christ, not the blood itself ; therefore,
by parity of reasoning, the u spiritual rock ” is the actual rock that
typified Christ, not Christ Himself.

I deny the consequence, for the Apostle in speaking of the Rock
inverts the phrase, and passes from the sign to the thing signified.
This is evident from his saying in explanation of the Rock, “ That

Digitized by v^,ooQle

230 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, c. X.

Rock was Christ” In other words, “ When I speak of the spiritual
Rock, I mean Christ.” What can be clearer? For it was not the
material but the spiritual Rock which was Christ : one was type, the
other antitype.

It may be urged again, that the phrase “They drank of the
spiritual Rock,” means that they drank the spiritual or typical
drink, for the rock giving this drink was spiritual or typical This
would give the connecting idea, and the reason for saying that
“ they drank the same spiritual drink,” for the rock was a type of
Christ.

The answer to this objection is that the sequence of thought is
clear enough. The particle for gives the efficient cause of so great
a miracle ; in other words, the Hebrews drank of water which
served as a type, for Christ was foreshadowed by the rock which
gave this water, and He miraculously gave them this typical water
in order that they might know and worship Christ giving it ; but this,
as the sequel shows, very many of them did not do.

The rock that gave the water allegorically stood for Christ, because
Christ, like a rock most firm, supports the Church, and was smitten,
i.e. f killed, by Moses, ue. % the Jews, with a rod; that is, the Cross
poured forth waters, that is, most fruitful streams of grace, to the
faithless of contradiction, to the faithful of sanctification. This is
especially true of the waters of His blood in the Eucharist, with
which He gives us drink in the desert of this life, that, strengthened
by them, we may attain to our country in the heavens. See S. John
vii. 37 and iv. 14. S. Augustine (< contra Faustum , lib. xvi. c. 15).

It may be argued : Some Catholic writers, according to the first
explanation given above, say that, as “that Rock was Christ” means
that it was typical of Christ, so in the same way it can be said of
the Eucharist, that “ this is My body ” means “ this bread is a figure
of My body.”

But add that the Apostle expressly says that he is speaking of
the spiritual, not the material rock. “ They drank of that spiritual
Rock,” he says, and “ that spiritual Rock was Christ.” It is called
a spiritual Rock, or typical, because it was a type of Christ But

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE JEWS AS ENSAMPLES

231

neither Christ nor S. Paul speak then of the Eucharist. S. Paul and
all the Evangelists uniformly declare that Christ said, “This is
My Body,” not, “This is My spiritual or typical Body.” Secondly,
I answer that that explanation of some writers is not a very pro-
bable one ; for that spiritual Rock, i.e. f the One signified, was really
Christ, not a type of Him. The words of S. Paul clearly say this.

Ver. 5. — For they were overthrown in the wilderness . All the

Hebrews who left Egypt with Moses died for their sins in the
wilderness, except Joshua and Caleb, who, with a new generation,
entered the Promised I^and (Num. xiv. 29).

Ver. 6. — As they also lusted \ I.e., after fleshly pleasures, as, e.g. y
in the place which was thence called “ the graves of lust,” because
the Hebrews were there slain by God, because of this lust of the
flesh (Num. xi. 33, 34).

Ver. 7. — Neither be ye idolaters . . . and rose up to play . Viz.,
when the Hebrews fashioned and worshipped the golden calf
they closed their idolatrous festivities with a banquet. Thus they
ate of the victims offered to their idol, that they might, after the
manner of the Egyptians, celebrate the worship of this new god
of theirs with a banquet and games. Hence it is said, “ They rose
up to play,” i.e., to dance and sing. For Moses (Exod. xxxii. 19),
when he descended, a little time afterwards, from the mount, saw
them dancing. This was the custom of the Gentiles after their
sacrifices, and these games were frequently of a most obscene
character. Hence the Rabbins and Tertullian (de Jej. contra Psychicos )
interpret this play of the Jews of fornication and uncleanness. They
celebrated, too, public games, which, Tertullian says, were forbidden
to Christians, as being held in honour of idols, and on the same
level, therefore, as things offered to idols (See Tert. de Speetac.).
But presently the wrath of God came on the people, as they were
worshipping the calf and sporting, and 23,000 of them were slain
by the Levites at the command of Moses. S. Paul impresses these
things on the Corinthians, because it was likely that they, before
their Christianity, had engaged in such games and feasts, and
had eaten of things offered to idols, in honour of their gods, and

Digitized by v^,ooQle

232 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

especially of Venus, to whom they daily offered a thousand maidens
for prostitution. They were, too, much given to lust and impurity.
Hence here, and in chap, vl 9, he warns them against fornication.
His meaning, then, is : See, O Corinthians, that you do not return
to idols, nor eat of things offered to them, and so become partakers
of idolatrous sacrifices; and do not give yourselves up to games,
to lust, and self-indulgence ; otherwise, like the Hebrews, you will
be punished by God, as apostates and idolaters, as gluttons and
drunkards.

Ver. 8 . — As some of them committed. When they worshipped
Baal-peor, i.e., Priapus, and in his honour committed fornication with
the daughters of Moab (Num. xxv.).

And fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Chrysostom,
Anselm, Cajetan, refer this to the plague which was sent because
of, the fornication with the daughters of Moab, and which is related
in Num. xxv. But in ver. 9 of that chapter the number slain is
given as 24,000, not 23,000. (1.) Some account for this by say-

ing that on one day only 23,000 were slain, and 1000 on the day
before. But this is pure conjecture, for Scripture says nothing of
this. (2.) Cajetan explains it by an error of some scribe, who wrote
23,000 for 24,000. (3.) (Ecumenius says that some read 23,000

in Num. xxv. 9 as well as here. (4.) Others say that the Apostle
is not wrong, because the greater number includes the less. But
it is simpler and more natural to say that the Apostle is referring to
Exod. xxxii. 28, where, according to the Roman Bible, 23,000 fell for
worshipping the golden calf. S. Paul, if this be so, is not referring
to the punishment inflicted on the fornicators of Num. xxv., but by
a Hebrew custom he looks back to the idolaters of ver. 7. We
must suppose that, having forgotten to mention the punishment
inflicted on them, he now gives it as an after- thought : certainly in
the sins he goes on to name he in each case adds the punishment
He does this to warn the Corinthians against such sins, and espe-
cially because the worship of the calf and the lust accompanying it
were exactly parallel, both in punishment and guilt, to the worship
and fornication in the matter of Baal-peor. S. Paul’s number agrees

Digitized by Goodie

PUNISHMENT OF IDOLATRY 233

with the older rendering of the Greek in Exod. xxxii. 28. The
LXX. now has 3000.

Ver. 9. Neither let us tempt Christ by disbelieving His promises,
as some of the Corinthians were doubting of the resurrection, as is
seen in chap. xv. See 2 Pet. iil 4.

As some of them also tempted \ The reference is to Num. xxi. 5.
The words there, “against God,* S. Paul here applies to Christ;
therefore Christ is God. Hence the Greek Fathers say that the
angel who appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and led the
Hebrews out of Egypt, was a type of Christ to come in the flesh, t'.e.,
of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

And were destroyed of serpents. See Num. xxi. 6. These fiery
serpents are not so called because they were of a fiery nature, for
this is repugnant to their true nature, but from the effect of their
bite and the heat of their breath : these caused such a heat in those
who were bitten that they seemed to be burning. These snakes
are called by the Greeks by names (Praester and Canso), which
denote burning, and are found in Libya and in Arabia, through
which the Hebrews were then passing.

Ver. 10. — As some of them also murmured , and were destroyed of
the destroyer , i.e., the angel by whom God inflicted punishment on
the Hebrews for murmuring, because Korah and his followers were
swallowed up alive by the earth. Fourteen thousand seven hundred
perished by fire (see Num. xyi. 30, 35, 40, 45; Wisd. xviii. 20;
Anselm in loco). This angel seems to have been Michael, the leader
of the people, the giver of the law on Sinai and its vindicator, and
a type of Christ, as was said just now (see Exod. xxiii. 21). Others
suppose that this “ destroyer ” was an evil angel or a devil, and refer
to Ps. lxxviiL 49. But the Psalmist is speaking of the plague sent on
the Egyptians, but Paul of those that God inflicted on the Hebrews.
Besides, it is truer to say that the plagues were inflicted on the
Egyptians by good angels, not by evil ones ; for, as S. Augustine
says, when commenting on Ps. lxxviii. 49, it is well known that it
was by good angels that Moses turned the water into blood, and pro-
duced frogs and lice ; for it was by these miraculous punishments

Digitized by v^,ooQle

234 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

that Moses and the good angels strove against the magicians cf
Pharaoh and the devils : hence at the third miracle of the lice they
exclaimed, “This is the finger of God.” The good angels are
called, in Ps. Ixxviii. 49, “evil,” as inflicters of evil

The Hebrews murmured very often in the wilderness, and nearly
always were punished by God. He thus wished to show that
murmuring and rebellion are worse than other sins in His sight.
So, in Num. xi., He slew those who murmured through fleshly lust,
and the place was therefore called “ the graves of lusts.” In the
same way all who murmured because of the report of the spies,
who said that Canaan was a land strongly fortressed, were excluded
from it, and perished in the wilderness; and of 600,000, Joshua
and Caleb alone entered it (Num. xiv. 29). So were Korah and his
followers punished clearly and severely.

Ver. 11. — Now all these things happened unto them for types . Viz.,
all those here mentioned. We are not to imagine that everything
that is related in the Old Testament is merely typical, as though it
contained nothing which did not figuratively represent something in
the New Testament S. Augustine (de Civ. Dei y lib. xvii. c. 5) says
truly : “ They seem to me to make a great mistake who think that the
things recorded in the Old Testament have no meaning beyond the
events themselves , just as much as those people are very venturesome
who contend that everything without exception in it contains allegorical
meanings .”

Gabriel Vasquez (p. 1, qu. i. art. 10, disp. 14, c. 6) rightly points
out that the word “figure” or “type” used here, does not mean so
much an allegorical sense, or a mystical one, as an example which
may be well applied for the purpose of persuasion. Thence S. Paul
adds, “they are written for our admonition.” In other words, God
punished the Hebrews that they might be an example to us, and
teach us wisdom.

Upon whom the ends of the world are come . That is, the last age
of the world. The Prophets call the time of the Messiah “the
last time.” (See 1 S. John ii. 18.) Ambrose and Chrysostom add
that the Apostle often speaks in this way, as though the end of

Digitized by v^,ooQle

LIMITS OF TEMPTATION

235

the world was at hand, that he may keep every one in expectation
and in fear of it, that so each one may be taught to prepare for it
diligently.

Ver. 1 2. — Let him that thinketh he siandeth take heed lest he fall
S. Augustine (de Bono Persev. cviiL) says: “It is good for ally or
nearly ally not to know what they will be, that each one , from not
knowing that he will persevere in good , , may humbly and anxiously
pray for the grace of God , , and with it do all he can to watch against
falling and to persevere in grace?

Ver. 13. There hath no temptation taken you, . The Vulgate reads
the verb in the imperative — “let no temptation take you.” His
meaning is : Be it, O Corinthians, that you are tempted to schisms,
lawsuits, lust, idolatry, yet remain constant, for these temptations
which take you are common to man, and therefore you can easily
overcome them if you like.

If you take the Roman reading, the meaning is, When, as is often
the case, any temptation of those which I have mentioned, or any
other, attacks your minds, do not take it in and foster it, so as to
let it grow imperceptibly in power, and to become at last uncon-
querable : for it is impossible to exclude altogether human and light
temptations so as to never feel them. Anselm says : “ To be overcome
by malignant temptation and to sin from malice is devilish: not to
feel its power is angelic ; to feel it and overcome it is human, .” See
also S. Gregory (Pastoral, pt. i. cxi.).

God is faithful \ who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye
are able, . z. If God does not suffer us to be tempted beyond our
strength, therefore much less, or rather in no way does God impel
us to sin, as Calvin thinks.

2. Nor does God enjoin impossibilities, as Luther thinks, nor
does He even permit them.

3. It follows from this that we can be so strongly tempted by
the devil and the flesh as to be unable to resist if the grace of God
does not succour us, as Chrysostom and Anselm say.

4. As a matter of fact there is no temptation so great but that
it can be overcome by the grace of God.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

236 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

5. The best remedy, therefore, against temptation is prayer, by
which we call down the help of God from distrust of our own strength
(S. Matt xxvi. 41).

6. This grace is promised here and elsewhere, not only to the elect,
but to all who duly call on God. See also decrees of the Council of
Trent (Sess. xxiv. can. 9, and Sess. vi. can. 11). For the Apostle is
speaking to the Christians at Corinth, many of whom were not
elect, but some contentious, causing offence, and drunken (chap. xi.
21). What is more, none of them knew that they were elected, so
as to be able to apply this consolation to themselves exclusively.

7. It is in the power of each Christian to obtain sufficient help
to overcome all temptations and all sins; for God pledges His
word to them to this, and He is One to be trusted, as the Apostle
says here. His meaning is: no temptation can take you, except on
your own side and by your own negligence; for on God’s side I
pledge myself that God, who is faithful, will perform what He has
promised, and will not suffer you to be tempted above that you are
able, ie, will not allow you to be tempted, except by human tempta-
tion. Understand, however, that this is if you seek His grace and
help, as is right, and co-operate with Him. “ God \ ” as S. Augustine
says (de Nat et Gratia , c. 43), and following him, the Council of
Trent (Sess. vi. can. il), “ God does not order impossibilities when
He orders us to resist every temptation ; but when He orders , it is to
bid us to do what we can , to seek help for what we cannot \ and then
He lends the strength? See S. Matt xi. 30 and 1 S. John v. 3.

S. Ephrem beautifully illustrates this saying of the Apostle as
follows : " If men? he says, “do not put upon their beasts more weight
than they can bear , much less will God put on men more temptations
than they can bear \ Again , if the potter bakes his vessels in the fire
until they are perfected , and does not remove them before they are pro-
perly baked and of the right consistency , and again does not leave them
in too long \ lest they be burnt too much and so become useless : much
more will God do the same with us , trying us with the fire of temptations
until we are purified and perfected ; but beyond that point He will not
suffer us to be scorched and consumed with temptation ” (de Paiientid).

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SUFFICIENCY OF GRACE

237

But will with the temptation also make a way to escape . God, who
suffers you to fall into temptation, will also make it turn out well, as
Erasmus and Augustine (in Ps. Ixii and Ep. 89) understand it. He
makes it good for you and your salvation, and will enable you to
come out of it without loss, nay, rather victoriously and with glory, as
Anselm says.

1. The word translated “ way of escape,” according to Theophylact,
CEcumenius, and the Greeks, means a happy end of the temptation,
so that it turns out well and promotes the good of the tempted ; for
God will either bring the temptation to a speedy ending, or not
permit it to go on to the fourth day, if He knows that we cannot
bear it for more than three days, as S. Ambrose says ; or if He gives
it longer life He gives us the power of bearing it, as Ambrose and
Anselm say.

2. It does not signify any way of escape, but such a way as when
a soldier comes out victorious from a battle or a single combat, more
renowned and even with increased strength and courage. So have
the saints come out of temptation. The Greek word then also means
a progress. Not only will God make the temptation no obstacle,
but a means even of advancement, causing an increase of strength,
virtue, grace, victory, and glory, a more certain walk in the way of
virtue and in the road to heaven. So Photius.

That ye may be able to bear it The Greek literally means, “ to
more than bear it,” i.e., so to bear it that strength remains over and
above to bear something farther. God gives such help that any one
can overcome temptation with flying colours. Hence the Fathers
often remark that men advance in virtue through temptations chiefly ;
the reason is, that no one can resist them, except by putting forth
contrary acts of virtue strongly and intensely, and where temptation
brings out such acts it strengthens and intensifies their habits.

3. The righteous wins merit by such acts ; he seeks and receives
from God an increased infusion of grace and all virtues.

Ver. 14. — Wherefore , my dearly beloved, \ flee from idolatry . Not
only avoid the worship which is given in sacrificing to and calling
on idols, but also abstain from eating things offered to idols from

Digitized by Google

238 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

any feeling of their sanctity, as the heathen eat them when the
sacrifice is completed, either at the altars or in the temples. So you
would share in their sacrifices, and would be thought to approve of

them, and even to offer them. The Apostle is now going on to
speak of the eating of things offered to idols. Chapter ix. was a
long digression about a paid or unpaid ministry, about the Christian
contest, the prize, and the competitors ; the earlier part of chap. x.
has been about the sins and punishments of the Hebrews ; and now,
after this long digression, he returns to the subject of things offered
to idols, which was begun in chap. viii. The “ wherefore ” signifies,

then, that he had written all that precedes for the purpose of warning
them against idolatry and idol-offerings.

Ver. 16 . — The cup of blessing which we bless . (1.) That is the
wine in the chalice which is blessed by the priest, and hence the
chalice itself, containing this consecrated wine, does it not com-
municate to us the blood of Christ? (2.) It may be called the cup
of blessing, because it blesses us and loads us with grace, as Anselm
and Chrysostom say. (3.) More accurately, it is called “the cup
of blessing,” because Christ blessed it before consecration, t'.e., called
down the power of God to afterwards effect a change both in the
bread and in the cup (S. Matt. xxvi. 26).

1. We see from the accounts of the Last Supper in S. Matt xxvi.,
S. Luke xxii., and here and in chap, xi., that Christ, before consecra-
tion of the Eucharist, gave thanks to God the Father, and, as He was
wont, lifted up his eyes to heaven, as is enjoined in the Roman
Canon of the Mass and in the Liturgy of S. James. Hence this
sacrament is called the Eucharist, or Thanksgiving, because it is
the greatest act of grace, and consequently is to be received with
the greatest thanksgiving.

2. Christ blessed the bread and wine, not, as heretics say, His
Father. And so Paul says expressly, “The cup which we bless.”
Christ blessed the bread and the cup, t\e., invoked the blessing and
power of God on the bread and wine, that it might be present, both
then and at all future consecrations, to change the bread into the
body, and the wine of the chalice into the blood of Christ, when

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CUP OF BLESSING

239

ever the words of consecration should be duly pronounced. Of the
same kind was the blessing of the bread in S. Luke ix. 16. This
blessing, then, was not the consecration, though S. Thomas thinks
that it was (pt iiL qu. 78, art i. ad. 1), but a previous prayer. (See
Council of Trent, Sess. xiii. can. 1). Hence in the Liturgies of S.
James and S. Basil, and in the Roman, after Christ’s example, God
is prayed to bless the gifts, that the Divine power may descend
upon the bread and the cup to complete the consecration ; and it
is thence that we have “the cup of blessing,” i.e., the cup blessed
by Christ.

Is it not the communion of the blood of Christ l 1. The com-
munion, or communication, of the body and blood of Christ not
only signifies that we receive the same body and the same blood of
Christ, but also, as is said in ver. 1 7, we become one body and one
blood. Therefore, the sacrament is not a type of the blood, as
Calvin thinks, but it is the very blood of Christ itself, and is given
to us in the Eucharistic chalice. If I were to say, “ I give you a
golden one,” you would rightly understand that I did not mean a
painted one. If I were to invite you to dinner, and a feast on the
hare or stag caught in the chase, and instead of the hare or stag
were to put before you on a dish a picture of the animals, should
I not be acting ridiculously? — should I not hear myself called an
impostor? Are not then the Protestants who transform the blood
and flesh of Christ, which He declares that He gives, into a figure
of that blood and flesh, acting ridiculously ? Are they not making
Christ an impostor ?

2. If this cup is only a figure of the blood, as the Protestants
think, then we have not more, but less, in the Eucharist than the
Jews had in the manna and the water miraculously provided for
their drink. The Apostle, too, should have said that we eat the
spriritual body and drink the spiritual blood of Christ, that is that
which represents them, just as he said that the Jews ate the spiritual
meat — the manna, and drank the spiritual drink — the water from
the rock. But as a fact he contrasts the blood and the flesh of
Christ in the Eucharist, as the reality and the thing signified, with

Digitized by Google

240 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

the manna and water, as the figure and spiritual type, signifying
the flesh and blood of Christ. Moreover, he calls the manna
spiritual meat, typical, and the water, spiritual drink; but he
calls the body of Christ in the Eucharist the body, and the blood
the blood. Who, then, can doubt that, as the manna was truly a
type and shadow, so in the Eucharist there is really the blood,
flesh, and body of Christ ?

3. Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, S. Thomas expressly ex-
plain this passage in this way. Theophylact says: “He does
not say the * participation ,* but the * communion * because he wished
to indicate something more excellent, viz., the closest possible union .
What he really says is this: What is in the chalice flowed from
the side of • Christ; and when we receive it, we have communion with,
or are united to Christ. Are you not then ashamed, O Corin-
thians, to have recourse to the cup of idols, and to leave this cup which
sets us free from idols f ”

S. Chrysostom most plainly dwells on this thought (in Horn. 24,
Moral.), where, exhorting Christians to mutual charity through Holy
Communion, he says : “If, then, dearly beloved, we understand these
things, let us also strive to maintain unity among ourselves ; for this
dreadful and wonderful sacrifice leads us to this : it bids us approach
one another with concord and perfect charity , and, like the eagles that
Christians have been made in this life, let us fly to heaven itself, or
rather above the heavens And again a little further on he thus ex-
plains what the body of Christ in the Eucharist is like: “ If no one
would lightly lay hold of another man's clothing, how can we receive
with insults the pure and immaculate body of the Lord, which is a
partaker of the Divine Nature, through which we are and live, which
burst open the gates of hell and opened heaven t This is the body
which was pierced by nails, scourged, unconquered by death ; this is the
body at the sight of which the sun hid his rays ; through which the
veil of the Temple was rent, and the rocks and the whole earth quaked ;
this is the body which was suffused with blood, pierced by the spear,
and which poured forth streams of blood and water to regenerate the
whole world! And a little further on he says that the body of

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE EUCHARISTIC PRESENCE

2 4 I

Christ in the Eucharist is the same as was in the manger : “ This
body in the manger the Magi adored, \ and with great fear and trem-
bling worshipped '. But thou seest Him not in a manger, but on the
altar . It is not a woman holding Him in her arms that you see , but
a priest is before you, and the Spirit shed abundantly upon the sacra-
ment spread forth. Let us, therefore, be stirred up and fear, and
show greater devotion than c7-er those barbarians did And after
some other remarks he asserts most clearly that in the Eucharist
we touch and feed on God Himself, and receive from Him all good
things, saying : “ This table is the strength of our soul, the vigour of our
mind, the bond of mutual trust, our foundation, hope, and salvation,
our light and our life. If we depart fortified by this sacrifice, we shall
with the greatest confidence climb the sacred hill which leads to heaven's
gate . But why speak of the future t For even while we are here in
this life, this mystery makes earth heaven : for the body of the King is
set before our eyes, on earth, as it is in heaven. I show you, not angels
or archangels, not heaven or the heaven of heavens , but the Lord of
them all. Nor do you merely gaze on Him : you touch Him, you feed
on Him ; you receive not a child of man, even though of kingly birth ,
but the Only-Begotten Son of God. Why, then, do you not shudder at

such Presence, and cast away the love of all worldly things f ”

A new preacher of a new word of Gojl has lately answered these
words by saying that S. Chrysostom spoke rhetorically. But this
evasion is as silly as futile ; for S. Chrysostom is, I admit, an orator,
but he is also a teacher of Christian truth. Hence in his com-
mentary itself, he says that he is treating of the literal meaning of
the Apostle. It is true that in the application of his sermon he does
enlarge on that meaning, but not so as to exceed or to deny the truth,
as, i.e., if he were to say that wood is stone, that a man is a brute,
that bread is flesh ; else he would not be an orator, but a lying
impostor, and that in matters of faith. For an orator would be false
and foolish who should say that the water of baptism was the very
same blood of Christ that flowed from His side, when the Jews
pierced His body with nails, and smote it with scourges ; if he were
to say that it was the God and Lord of all, he would no doubt mean

VOL. 1. Q

Digitized by v^,ooQle

242 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

that the water of baptism is a type of the blood of Christ, who
applies it to us to wash away our sins. In the same way he is false
and foolish who says that the bread and wine are the very blood,
the very body of Christ, which was adored by the Magi in the
manger, nailed to the Cross, scourged, and crucified by the Jews,
nay, that it is the very Lord of all things, and the Onlv-Begotten
Son of God, as S. Chrysostom says. I appeal to you, reader, to
read these words of his candidly and impartially, or to say whether
they are true of the manna, of the Paschal lamb, or of any such type.
Would S. Chrysostom have spoken of them thus ? Would Calvin,
or Viretus, or Zwinglius, or any of their following, no matter how
eloquent an orator he might be, speak of their supper in this way?
If it is lawful to sublimate and invert the meanings of authors and
the words of the Fathers in this way, it will be lawful to invert all
faith, all history, all the opinions of these men, and to twist them
to a totally different sense. All this will better appear in the fol-
lowing verses.

The bread which we break , is it not the communion of the body of
Christ t The sense is, The communication to us, or the eating of
the bread which we break, communicates to us also the very body
of Christ, so that each one actually partakes of it in the Eucharist

It may be said: The Eucharist is here called bread, therefore
it is not the flesh of Christ

I reply that bread, by a Hebraism, stands for any food (2 Kings
ii. 22). So Christ is called manna (S. John vi. 31), and bread (Ibid.
vi. 41). The reason is that bread is the common and necessary food
of all. Moreover, S. Paul does not say “bread” simply, but “the
bread which we break,” *.&, the Eucharistic or transubstantiated
bread, which is the body of Christ, and yet retains the species and
power of bread. In this agree all the Fathers and orthodox doctors.
Christ, on other occasions as well as in the Last Supper, is said to have
broken and distributed the bread, according to the Hebrew custom
by which the head of the house was wont to break the bread and
divide the food among the guests sitting at table. For the Easterns
did not have loaves shaped like ours, which need a knife to cut them

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE ONE BREAD

243

up, but they used to make their bread into wide and thin cakes, as,
amongst others, Stuckius has noticed ( Convival lib. ii. c. 3). Hence
“to break bread” signifies in Scripture “to feast,” and breaking
bread signifies any feast, dinner, or meal. In the New Testament it
is appropriated to the Eucharist; therefore “to break bread” is
a sacramental and ecclesiastical term. Hence S. Paul calls here
the Eucharist “ the bread which we break,” meaning the species of
the body of Christ which we break and consume in the sacrament.
See further on c. xi. 24.

Ver. 17. — For we being many are one breads and one body : for we
are all partakers of that one bread. As one loaf is made out of many
grains of wheat, so of many faithful is made one holy and living
bread, the one mystical body of Christ, the Church, not only gene-
rally and mystically, but properly and substantially, because all are
really united to the body of Christ, and become one with it, in the
Eucharist, just as food becomes one with him that eats it. Hence
it may be rightly argued against Protestants that we all eat really the
same body of Christ. They, however, say that in the Eucharist all
Christians become one, because they eat the same sacramental
bread, which is a type of the body of Christ But who would ever
say of such a feast in common that it makes all who share in it one,
merely because they sit at the same table and eat of the same bread ?
It would be a statement at once untrue and foolish. It is, however,
true when applied to the body of Christ, because we all feed on what
is numerically one, especially because this holy bread, as S. Augus-
tine says, when eaten, is not charged into our substance, but rather
changes us into its own, and unites us to itself and makes us like
it, which ordinary bread does not do. Here Cyril of Alexandria {in
foan. lib. iv. c. 17) says: “As wax is incorporated into wax , and
leaven permeates through breads so do we become fused into the body of
Christ.” And Cyril of Jerusalem ( Catachesis , 4) says: “In Holy
Communion we become , not only bearers of Christy but also sharers
of the same body and the same blood as He.” This is because we
become one with Christ and Christ with us, because we are really
blended with the flesh of Christ, and therefore with His Person, His

Digitized by Google

244 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

Godhead, and His omnipotence. Irenaeus says the same (lib. iv. c.
34), and Hilary (de Trin. lib. viii.).

It is for this reason that the Eucharist is called Communion by the
Fathers : it really unites us to the body of Christ, so that all become
one in Him and with Him. “ Communion ,” then, is the common union
of the faithful, who, by feeding on the same true body of Christ
in the Eucharist, are made one mystical body, the Church. So
says Bede, following S. Augustine Hence, too, the Council of Trent
(sess. xiii. c. 8) says : “ This sacrament is the sign of unity , the bond of
charity , the symbol of peace and concord \ n no doubt because, in a
wonderful way, it signifies and perfects the unity of the body of Christ,
i.e., of the faithful of the Church. For this reason, too, the Eucharist
was formerly given to infants after their baptism, that they might be
perfectly incorporated into Christ (vide S. John vi. 55). Again for
the same reason the Eucharist was called by S. Dionysius, Synaxis ,
i.e., “congregation,” because the faithful were in the habit of assem-
bling in the church to receive the Eucharist Tertullian even says
(de Oratione, cap. ult) that prayer should end when the body of the
Lord has been received. The Apostle too, in the next chapter (ver.
20), says: “ When ye come together, therefore, into one place, this is
not to eat the Lords supper For although the Church becomes
the body of Christ through faith and baptism, yet this is done more
truly and properly in the Eucharist.

Heretics raise the objection that therefore only the good and
righteous are parts and members of the Church, for the Apostle
says, “ We are all one bread ; ” but bread, they say, is made from
grains of wheat, not from chaff ; therefore the Church is formed
from the righteous, not from the wicked ; for the righteous are the
com, the wicked are the chaff.

I reply (1.) that this does not follow, because a similitude is not
bound to be in all points alike ; (2.) that the major premiss is false,
for often chaff, grains of sand, lentils are mingled with the wheat,
and with it go to make up the bread. Hence S. Paul (c. xL 29) says
that even the wicked eat of this bread. But here he says that all
who partake of this bread make up the one body of Christ, which is

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 245

the Church : therefore the wicked, also, who eat of this bread are of
the Church. Vide S. Cyprian (Ep. ad Magnum , lib. i. ; Ep. 6).

Ver. 18. — Behold Israel after the flesh . . . partakers of the altar f
That is, of the victim offered on the altar, by metonymy. All this
is meant to prove that things sacrificed to idols ought not to be
partaken of ; and the sense is : See, O Corinthians, Israel after the
flesh: when they eat of the victims offered to God, are they not
deemed to be partakers of the sacrifice offered on the altar to God,
and to consummate the sacrifice, and in a sense therefore to sacrifice ?
In the same way that they who eat pf the Eucharistic bread are
sharers of the Eucharistic sacrifice, are they who eat of things offered
to idols sharers of idolatrous sacrifices : they consummate them, and
in a sense sacrifice to idols. He proves, from the example of the
Jews, that they who eat of things sacrificed to idols give their con-
sent to such sacrifices, and tacitly sacrifice to those idols.

Ver. 19. — What say I then f that the idol is anything, &c. By no
means : for the idol and that offered to it are nothing, have no
influence or power. See viiL 4.

Vers. 20, 21. — But I say . . . Ye cannot be par takers of the lord's
table and of the table of devils . The table is the altar, which is, as
it were, God s table at which He feasts with us. See Lev. i. ; Mai.

i. 12; Ambrose, Anselm, and the Council of Trent (sess. xxii. c. 1),
where it lays down from this passage that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.
For that the Apostle is dealing with the Eucharist and not with the
sacrifice of the Cross appears plainly — 1. Because the Victim of
the Cross has passed away, and long ago ceased ; but the Apostle
is here treating of a sacrifice of which the Corinthians were partakers
daily.

2. From the phrase, “the Lord’s table,” i.e., the altar. Where
there is an altar there is a priest and a sacrifice, for the three are
correlative terms. If, then, the Corinthians had an altar, they had
also a sacrifice, and that of course none other than the Eucharist.

3. “ The cup of the Lord ” can only be the cup offered to the
Lord, for the cup of devils is none other than the one offered
to them.

Digitized by Google

246 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

4 From the context, and the line of the Apostle’s argument,
which is this : As the Jews, when they eat of their peace-offerings,
share in and consent to the sacrifice of them that is made on God’s
altar, so do those who eat of things sacrificed to idols share in and
consent to the sacrifice of them that is made to idols ; and so do
Christians, when they receive the Eucharist, become partakers of
the Eucharistic sacrifice, and sacrifice the Eucharist to God by
the priest. It is consequently unseemly altogether that they should
also sacrifice to a devil, which they do by partaking of things offered
to idols, as a part of the idolatrous sacrifice ; for no one can at once
sacrifice to God and a deviL C£ S. Augustine {contra Advers . Legis
et Prophet lib. i. c. xix). Chrysostom in loco , Anselm, Theophylact,
GEcumenius, Ambrose, Theodoret say the same thing. S. Cyprian
{de Lapsis) expressly teaches the same lesson, and confirms it by
the numerous examples of those who, after eating of things offered
to idols, came to the Eucharist, and were punished by God accord-
ingly; and he adds : “An earthly commander will not suffer any one
of his soldiers to fly to the camp of his enemies and there to work ; how
much less can God suffer His followers to take part in the banquets
of devils ?”

Notice (1.) that when the sacrifice was completed, the flesh which
had been offered on the idol’s altar was removed from it to a table,
near the altar or temple, in order that they who had offered it might,
with the friends they had invited, eat of it there ; for sacrifices and
religious feasts were generally concluded with such a sacred banquet
Cf. the sacrifice offered by Evander and ALneas in Virgil {/Eneid y
viii. 179-183). So, too, the Jews were in the habit of eating in the
porch before the Temple of the sacrifices which they had offered
(1 Sam. ix. £3). So, too, Christ concluded the Eucharistic sacrifice
with a banquet on it, and a distribution of it to the Apostles.
Hence, too, in the primitive Church, all the faithful communicated
at the Mass, that they might be partakers of the sacrifice, and con-
clude it with such a banquet. Again, the heathen, who sacrificed
victims to their idols, used, after the sacrifice, to carry home with
them portions of it to give to those in their house, and to send to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE FEAST ON THE SACRIFICE

247

their friends, that so the absent might be partakers of the sacri-
fice, as Giraldus (dc JDiis Gentium ) points out from Herodotus and
others. Similarly, the Christians in the time of persecution used
to carry home the Eucharist, and even sent it to the absent, as
a mark of love and communion, and to enable them to be par-
takers of the sacrifice. Cf. Eusebius, Hist. lib. v. c. 24 and 29.

Notice (2.) that the Apostle gives a plain answer to the question,
whether it was lawful to eat of things offered to idols. He says that
it never had been, nor was then, lawful to eat of things offered to idols,
as such, or as being sacred to idols. He who so eats of them tacitly
admits by the very act that the idol is sacred, has some Divine
influence, and that, because of the idol, the flesh offered is sacred,
because offered to a Divine being, which is idolatry. This takes
place whenever such food is partaken of in such a place, in such
a way, and under such circumstances, as that the eater is morally
thought to eat it out of honour to the idol, as when the offerers
sent portions to their friends with the intention of showing worship
to the idol, when their friends received and ate them. Again, the
case is still more clear, if you eat directly after the sacrifice, near
the altar or the temple, together with those that offer the sacrifice,
in presence of idolaters ; for then you are rightly judged to eat it to
the honour of the idol. It is otherwise if afterwards you feed on
it alone, and from hunger or greediness, whether it be at home or
at the temple, because in that case you are not thought to feed
on it as being sacred to the idol, but you are seen to be merely
gratifying your hunger or appetite. It may be said, S. Augustine
(Ep. 154, and de Bono Conj. c. xvl, and contra Faustum 9 lib. xxxii.
a 13) asks whether a Christian, when travelling and pressed by
hunger, may, if he can find nothing but some food offered to an idol,
and if no one is present, eat of it, or whether it is better for him to
die ; and he answers, It may be said that it is either known to have
been offered to the idol or not : if it is known, it is better for it to
be rejected by Christian virtue ; if it is not known, it may be taken
for his necessity without any scruple of conscience.” Otherwise,
as I have said, it is better to reject it, lest the eater should seem

Digitized by Google

248 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

to have communicated with idols. He ought then to abstain from
things offered to idols, if they are known to be such.

I reply that S. Augustine does not say that he must abstain from
it, if he knows that it has been so offered. He says “it is better for
it to be rejected by Christian virtue,” implying pretty plainly that it
is lawful to eat of it, but that it would be better and more noble if
he abstained from it and preferred death. There is a parallel case
in the Carthusian rule. One in extreme weakness is allowed to eat
flesh to save his life ; but he will do what is better and more holy if
he follow his profession and abstain and so die. Cf. Victoria {Releet.
de Temferant. num. 8), Azorius ( Morals , lib. v. c. 6), and others.
For he is not bound to save his life at all costs, but he may rank it
below his vow, or rather the holiness of his profession, so as to give
an example of virtue to others, and to hallow the discipline and
rigour of his order. The Carthusians do not take a formal vow of
abstinence from flesh, but merely have it enjoined on them by the
constitutions of their order.

Ver. 22. — Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy f Ie. t to anger.
Do we set up a rival to the Lord ? Do we leave Him, our Bride-
groom, and cling to a devil, and the things offered to him, or at all
events wish to serve both, and yoke together God and the devil?
So Chrysostom, Anselm, Theophylact. S. Paul is alluding to Deut.
xxxiL 21. S. Jerome, commenting on Habakkuk ii., rightly says the
unclean spirits preside over all idols, and answer those who call on
the idols, and give oracular replies, and lend them help.

Are we stronger than He t By no means ; therefore our provok-
ing God to anger will not go unpunished by Him.

Ver. 23. — All things are lawful for me . Viz., all things that are
not essentials, such as to eat of things offered to idols, not as sacred,
or as things sacrificed, but as common food. So far Paul has treated
of things offered to idols as such, and has forbidden the use of
them. Hence, in ver. 14, he bids the Corinthians fly from idolatry,
the meats of ver. 20. But in this verse he passes on to the
second case, when meat that has been offered to idols is partaken of,
not formally as such, but materially, as mere food or flesh ; and with

Digitized by v^,ooQle

LAW OF ADIAPHORA

249

regard to this he says, “ All things arc lawful to me y but all things
are not expedient? because all things do not edify. Materially, you
may eat of things offered to idols considered in themselves, but if
there is attached to such action the giving of offence, then you may
not; see vers. 27, 28, 33. Clement ( Stromata ) well said: “They
who do whatsoever is lawful will easily sink into doing what is un-
lawful? Theophylact explains this verse differently, but his ex-
planation is beside the drift of the context

Ver. 24. — Let no man seek his own , but every man another’s wealth .
Let no one seek or buy flesh which, e.g., has been offered to idols,
and which is useful and pleasant to himself, just because it is of
a low price; but in such matters let each one seek his neighbour’s
edification, and not to buy it or eat it, so as to cause him offence
or spiritual loss. So Theophylact

Ver. 25. — Whatsoever is sold in the shambles , that eat \ asking no
question. Eat indifferently everything, whether offered to idols or
not Asking no question^ i.e., making no difference, or according to
S. Ambrose, making no inquiry ; according to Theopyhlact, without
hesitation.

Herodotus tells us, as well as S. Augustine in the commentary he
commenced on the Epistle to the Romans (c. 78), that the heathen
custom was to send to the shambles whatever remained over of the
sacrificed meats after the feast, and to give the priests the proceeds.
In the shambles, therefore, they were looked upon as any other
meats, as having returned to secular and common use. S. Augustine
says : “ Some weaker brethren at that time abstained from flesh and
wine , lest they should unknowingly partake of things offered to idols;
for all kinds of sacrificial flesh were offered for sale in the shambles ,
and the heathens used to pour out libations of wine to their images ,
and even to offer sacrifices at their winepresses ? Hence the Apostle
dispels this scruple, and bids them buy and eat freely whatever was
sold in the shambles, making no distinction between meats, nor
asking where they came from, as if it were a matter of conscience, or
as though the flesh needed cleansing, if it came from an idol’s temple.
The Christians of Antioch followed this teaching of the Apostles,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

250 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

when Julian the Apostate endeavoured to force them into idolatry
through idol meats. Theodoret (lib. i. c. xiv.) thus describes the
incident: “Julian first polluted the water-spring with victims offered
to idols, so that every one who drank of the water was infected. He
then polluted in the same way whatever was offered for sale in the
market; for bread, flesh, fruits, vegetables, and all other eatables
were sprinkled with this water ; but when the Christians saw this,
though they could not but grieve and detest the wickedness, still
they ate of such things, in obedience to the injunction of the
Apostle: “Whatsoever is sold in the shambles that eat, asking no
question.”

For conscience sake , as though you were bound to ask whether the
meat which they wish to sell has been offered to idols, it being
not lawful for you to buy and eat such. So Anselm, Ambrose,
Theodoret It is evident from this that Paul is not speaking of the
fasts of the Church, or saying that on any day, even a fast day, it is
lawful to eat meat which is exposed for sale in the shambles. For
these fasts do not belong to the class of non-essentials, but are pre-
cepts of the Church. Therefore S. Paul, in Acts xv., xvi., ordered
the decree concerning abstinence from things strangled and from
blood to be observed, though it was a mere positive precept enjoined
by the Apostles alone.

Ver. 26. — For the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof. Every
creature, because it is the Lord’s, is good and clean; so, too, things
offered to idols are not unclean, as you suppose, because they have
been offered to a devil, but are clean, because created by the Lord.
So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm. Theophylact gives another
meaning as well : “ Abstain from all food sacrificed to idols, for the
whole earth is the Lord’s, and you can be abundantly satisfied from
other sources.” But this meaning is not suited to the context, espe-
cially, to the injunction, “ Eat whatever is sold in the shambles.”

Ver. 27. — If any of them believe not . . . for conscience sake. “ Do
not seem ,” says Theophylact, “to be afraid of idols with too anxious
scrupulousness , or excessive curiosity , but keep your conscience free and
uninjured For if you ask and are told that it has been offered to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CAUSING NO OFFENCE 25 1

idols, your conscience will be bound, and will not allow you to eat
of it. Hence he goes on to say —

Ver. 28. — But if any man say unto you . . . for his sake that
showed it. If any unbeliever who has invited you to dinner, or any
other idolater tell you that the meat on the table has been offered to
idols, and is therefore sacred and to be religiously eaten, you cannot
then eat it, for he will think that you are a partaker of his idolatry.
Or if a Christian whose conscience is scrupulous point it out, thinking
it unlawful to eat it because polluted by idolatry, do not then eat it,
lest you cause him to offend. But if no offence could be caused,
either to the faithful or unbelievers, it is lawful to eat of things offered
to idols, even if they are pointed out and known as such.

For conscience sake. Lest you wound the conscience of your
brother that is weak in the faith, who is sitting at table with you, by
inducing him to follow your example and eat meats offered to idols,
when his conscience forbids it

Ver. 29. — Why is my liberty judged of another mads conscience ?
Why should I use my liberty in such a way as gives offence and
incurs condemnation by another man’s conscience? For since he
is weak and untaught, he thinks that I do a thing to be condemned
if I eat of idol-meats. But this I ought not to do. S. Ambrose.

Ver. 30. — If I by grace be a partaker , why am I evil spoken of for
that for which I give thanks ? Although it is lawful for me to eat of
things offered to idols, through the grace of Gospel liberty, and give
thanks to God for them, yet why should I expose myself to the re-
proaches of others, that they should speak of me as an idolater or
polluted by communion with idols ? From this verse it would seem
to have been the custom of the ancients to ask a blessing before
meals, and to give thanks afterwards. Cf. 1. Tim. iv. 4, 5.

Ver. 31. — Whether therefore ye cat, or dr ink, or whatsoever ye do } do
all to the glory of God. 1. This is a matter of counsel, not of pre-
cept, for we are not bound in every act nor in every virtue to seek
the glory of God, though to do so is very meritorious. In the same
way he says in chap. xv. 14 : “ Let all your things be done with
charity.” 2. If any one, with Anselm, Ambrose, and Cajetan, thinks

Digitized by v^,ooQle

252 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. X.

that it is a precept, he must explain it to mean that all our works
must be of such a character that they are likely to promote the glory
of God, such that God may be glorified because of them, no one be
offended, and the glory of God not injured, but all edified, and the
glory of God therefore spread abroad. This second meaning is
more suitable here, as appears from what has gone before, where S.
Paul has been dealing with the duty of avoiding giving offence, and
also from what follows in the next verse. For S. Paul is opposing
the glory of God to the glory of devils, who are served by those who
eat things offered to idols, in their honour, or when offence is caused
to our neighbour; on the other hand, they serve the glory of God
who abstain from idols, and eat of such things and do such things,
as help to promote the honour and worship of God and the salvation
of their neighbours.

S. Thomas (iii. qu. c. art io ad 2) explains it differently; he
says that it is a precept bidding us always refer ourselves and every-
thing in general to the glory of God as their final cause. But the
Apostle is speaking here, not of this or that act, but of that which we
ought to do continuously.

3. The sense will be more comprehensive if the verse is explained
in this way : Study to promote the glory of God (which is a matter
of counsel) in all things so carefully that you keep strict watch
against doing anything which may be against God's glory, against
giving in anything cause of offence, as, c.g., in eating of things offered
to idols, lest God be reproached : this last is a matter of precept.
For although this saying and counsel of the Apostle's is positive, it
nevertheless includes a negative precept Hence it does not follow
from this that all the works of unbelievers are sinful because they
do not do them to the glory of God, of whom they know nothing ;
for, as I have said, to do all our works, and to refer them in act to
the glory of God, is a matter of counsel, not of precept

Tertullian (de Carotid) and S. Jerome {ad Eustochium) gather from
this the explanation of the custom of the Christians of that time, to
sign themselves with the sign of the Cross at the beginning of every
work, which was as good as saying: “Let this work be done to the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ACTING TO GOD'S GLORY

253

glory of God, in the name, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost.” S. Basil (in ReguL Brev. Reg. 196) asks, “How does
a man eat and drink to the glory of God ; ” and his answer is, that
this is done when a man is mindful of the benefits bestowed on him
by God, when he is so well-disposed as not to eat at all carelessly,
but with the recollection that God searches him out ; when he makes
it his purpose not to eat merely for the pleasure of satisfying his
appetite, but as God's workman, that he may have strength to serve
Him better, and to perform the commands of Christ This surely
would become not only religious, but all Christians and true wor-
shippers of God. S. Basil again ( Horn . in Julittam Mart.), quoting
this verse, says beautifully: “ When you sit at table, pray ; when you
eat your bread, give thanks to the Giver ; when you drink wine , think
of Him who gave it to you to gladden you, and to strengthen your
weakness ; when you put on your coat , give thanks to the kindly Giver;
when you look up at the heavens and see the beauty of the stars , fall
down before God and worship Him , who by His wisdom made all
these things . Similarly, when the sun rises and sets, whether in sleeping
or waking, give thanks to God, who created and ordained all these things
for your good, that you might know, love, and praise the Creator .”

Ver. 33. — Even as I please all men in all things . I do all I can
to please them, that I may edify them and give no offence to any
one, even though I may actually displease some who are ignorant,
or jealous, or perverse. 1 please means here the desire of pleasing,
the inchoate act ; and the Apostle therefore adds, “not seeking mine
own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved."

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER XI

He reproroeth them , because in holy assemblies 4 their men prayed with their
heads covered , and 6 women with their heads uncovered ' 17 and because gene-
rally their meetings were not for the better but for the worse, as 21 namely in
profaning with their own feasts the LorcCs supper . 23 Lastly , he calleth them
to the first institution thereof

B E ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and
keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ ; and the
ead of the woman is the man ; and the head of Christ is God.

4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoured
his head.

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesied with ^rhead uncovered
dishonoured her head : for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn : but if it be a shame
for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasumch as he is the image
and glory of God : but the woman is the glory of the man.

8 For de man is not of the woman ; but de woman of the man.

9 Neither was the man created for the woman ; but the woman for the man.

10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the
angels.

11 Nevertheless neither is de man widout de woman, neither the woman
without the man, in the Lord.

12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman ;
but all things of God.

13 Judge in yourselves : is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered ?
14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a
shame unto him ?

1 5 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her : for her hair is given
her for a covering.

16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neider de
churches of God.

17 Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together
not for de better, but for the worse,

18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear dat there be
divisions among you ; and I partly believe it.

19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved
may be made manifest among you.

*54

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SYNOPSIS 255

20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the
Lord’s supper.

21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper : and one is
hungry, and another is drunken.

22 What ? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in ? or despise ye the church
of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I
praise you in this ? I praise you not.

23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you.
That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread :

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat : this is
my body, which is broken for you : this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood : this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in
remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s
death till he come.

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord,
unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink
of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation
to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not
be condemned with the world.

33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for
another.

34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home ; that ye come not together
unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

The Apostle proceeds to deal with the third point put before him, that of the
veiling of women ; for the Corinthians had asked of S. Paul whether or no
women ought to be veiled. He replies that they ought, and especially at the
time of public prayer, and he supports his decision by five reasons: (1.) that
womanly honour and modesty demand it (vers. 5 and 14); (2.) that they are
subject to men (vers. 7 et seq .) ; (3.) that if they go forth with uncovered head
they offend the angels (ver. 10)5 (4.) that nature has given them hair for a
covering (ver. 15) ; (5.) that this is the custom of the Church (ver. 16).

The second part of the chapter (ver. 17) treats of the Eucharist, and in this
he censures as an abuse that in the agapae, or common meal, the rich excluded
the poor, and sat apart by themselves, giving themselves to self-indulgence and
drunkenness. Then (ver. 23) he gives an account of the institution of the
Eucharist by Christ, and declares the guilt and punishment of those who approach
it unworthily, and bids each one examine himself before he approach to it.

Digitized by Google

256 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

Ver. i. — Be ye followers of me, even as also 1 am of Christ
This is a continuation of the preceding chapter. Imitate me, O
Corinthians, in that, as I said, I do not seek my own advantage
but that of many, that they may be saved ; and in this I imitate the
zeal of Christ, who sought not His own good but our salvation, and
to gain it descended from heaven to earth, took our flesh, toiled,
and gave Himself to the death of the Cross.

Ver. 2. — Now I praise you, brethren , that ye remember me in all
things . He here passes on and paves the way for a fresh ques-
tion. In the following verses he proceeds to censure the abuses of
the Corinthians in suffering their women to go unveiled, and in ap-
proaching the Eucharist when full of wine and mutual discords, and
according to his custom he softens his rebuke that the Corinthians
may take it the more readily and kindly, in the same way that
physicians sugar their pills. He says, therefore, “I praise you that
ye remember me in all things,” which, as Erasmus says, means “that
ye keep in memory all my things,” or, as Euthymius says, “that ye
are mindful of everything that belongs to me.” Supply “precepts,
teachings, or exhortations ” after “ all.” All these precepts, &c., must
be understood with some limitation, and must mean that most of
them were kept by the better sort of the Corinthians, for in other
parts of this Epistle he censures some faults of the Corinthians, and
especially in this chapter their abuse of the Eucharist, as a departure
from the ordinance of Christ and His own precepts.

As I delivered them to you. — The Greek gives, when translated
literally, as even Beza admits, “Ye keep the traditions as I delivered
them to you.” Hence, since these traditions were not committed
to writing by the Apostles, for no previous letter to the Corinthians
containing a record of them is extant, it plainly follows that not every-
thing which concerns faith and morals has been written down in Holy
Scripture, and that S. Paul and the other Apostles delivered many
things by word of mouth. This is even more clearly stated in vers.
23 and 34. It is evident, moreover, from the fact that before that
had been written which S. Paul here writes about the Eucharist,
&c, the Corinthians were bound to obey the precepts respecting

Digitized by v^,ooQle

WOMANLY MODESTY

257

them given by Christ and S. Paul, as he says himself in ver. 23.
The law preserved in tradition binds equally with the written law.
So Chrysostom, Theophylact, and others.

Ver. 3 . — But I would have you know, that . . . the head of Christ is
God. S. Paul here lays the foundation for his* precepts about the
veiling of women. We must bear in mind that the Corinthian
women were greatly given, not only to lust, but also to the worship
of Venus, so much so that a thousand maidens were every day
exposed as prostitutes at her temple and in her honour. (Cf. notes
to chap. vi. at the end.) Moreover, they thought this to be to their
own honour and an act of piety, and they hoped to conciliate the
goddess in this way to bestow upon them and their daughters, or
to continue to them, a happy marriage. They were consequently
wanton, and forward to attract lovers by exposing their features and
displaying their form ; and this was regarded at Corinth as a custom
honourable, becoming, and elegant, and Christian women thought
that they ought to retain the custom of their fathers. Some of the
Corinthians whose minds were of a higher cast advised S. Paul of
this fact, and put to him the question whether it was lawful or
becoming for Christian women to go about with uncovered head,
and especially in the Church. Paul replies that it is neither be-
coming nor lawful, and he begins here to give his reasons. The
first is that the woman is subject to the man as her head, therefore
she ought to be veiled ; again, man is subject to God as His image,
and therefore he is not to be veiled. In vers. 7 and 10 he proves
both conclusions.

Head here has the meaning of lord, superior, or ruler. So God,
as being of a higher nature, is the head and ruler of Christ as man ;
while Christ, as being of the same nature with the Church, is her
Head, and that, as S. Thomas says, in four ways : (1.) by reason of
conformity of nature with other men, for Christ as man is the Head
of the Church; (2.) by reason of the perfection of His graces;
(3.) by reason of His exaltation above every creature; (4.) by
reason of His power over all, and especially over the Church. So

the man, S. Thomas says, is head of the woman in four ways :

VOL. 1. R

Digitized by Google

258 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

(1.) He is more perfect than the woman, not only physically, inas-
much as woman is but man with a difference, but also in regard to
mental vigour, according to Eccles. vii. 28: “One man among a
thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I
not found.” (2.) Man is naturally superior to woman, according to
Eph. v. 22, 2'3 : “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands,
as unto the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife.” (3.) The
man has power to govern the woman, according to Gen. iiL 16:
“ Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
(4.) The man and the woman enjoy conformity of nature, according
to Gen. ii. 18 : “I will make him an help meet for him.”

Vers. 4 and 5 . — Every man prayings &c. This is the second
reason : It is disgraceful for a man to be veiled, and, therefore, the
honour, freedom, and manliness of man require that he veil not his
head, but leave it free and unconstrained. On the other hand, it
is disgraceful for a woman not to be veiled, for womanly honour and
modesty require a woman to veil her head ; therefore the woman
ought to be veiled, the man ought not. The phrase, “ Every woman
that prayeth or prophesieth,” does not use “ prophesieth ” in its strict
and proper meaning of uttering a prophecy or an exposition, but in
the improper sense of singing hymns or psalms to the praise of
God. For S. Paul is here speaking of the public assembly, in which
he does not allow a woman to speak or to teach, but only to sing
her part well when the whole congregation sings. Prophet means
singer in 1 Chron. xxv. 1, and in 1 Sam. x. 10. So Saul is said to
have been among the prophets, that is among the singers of praises
to God. So in the Books of Kings those are called prophets who
served God with praises.

Some explain “ that prophesieth ” to mean “ that hears prophecy ; ”
but “prophecy” has never this passive meaning. Moreover, the
Apostle here means any woman, whether unmarried, virgin, married,
or unchaste. He bids all alike to go veiled. So Tertullian (de Vel.

Virg . c. 4 and 5) lays down, and adds that the Corinthians under-
stood this to be S. Paul’s meaning, for up to that time, he says,
they follow S. Paul’s injunction, and veil their wives and daughters.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE VEILING OF WOMEN

259

Ver. 6. — For if a woman be not covered \ let her also be shorn. For
here is not causal, but an emphatic continuative. It is as disgraceful for
a woman to have her head uncovered as to have her hail cut short or
cut off. Heretics infer from this that it is wrong for religious virgins
to be shorn ; but I deny that it follows ; for the Apostle is speaking
in general of women living in the world, especially of married women,
who are seen in public in the temple : he is not speaking of religious
who have left the world. These latter rightly despoil themselves of
their hair, to show (1.) that they contemn all the pomp of the world,
(2.) that they have no husband but Christ. This was the custom at
the time of S. Jerome, as he says (Ep. 48 ad Sabin.). The Nazarites
did the same (Num. vi. 5).

It may be urged that the Council of Gangra (can. 17) forbids
virgins to be shorn under pretext of religion. I reply from Sozomen
(lib. iii. c. 13) that this canon does not refer to religious, but to
heretical women, who left their husbands and against their will cut
off their hair, in the name of religion, and donned man's dress.

It is these that the Council excommunicates, as Baronius rightly
points out ( Annals , vol. iv.). Add to this that religious virgins wear
a sacred veil instead of their hair.

It should be noticed that, although Theodosius (Codex Theod.
lib. 27, de Epis. et Cler.) forbade virgins to be shorn in the West,
that is to say, younger women not living within the walls of a
monastery, but wishing to profess a religious life of chastity in the
world, his reason was to prevent scandal, which would be caused
if, as sometimes was the case, they happened to fall away into the
ordinary secular life. This actually happened in the very same
year that this law was passed by Theodosius, as Baronius has well
pointed out ( Annals , a.d. 390). Sozomen, too (lib. vii. c 26), gives
the same reason for its being passed. A young matron at Con-
stantinople, and of noble birth, and a deaconness, had been, it would
seem, seduced by a deacon ; and when, according to custom, by the
order of her confessor she was making a public confession of certain
sins, she proceeded to confess also this sin of fornication to the
great scandal of the people ; and because of this Nectarius abolished

Digitized by v^,ooQle

260 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XL

public confession and the office of public penitentiary. Still it has
ever been the common practice of the Church that virgins, when
taking vows of religion, should be shorn. S. Jerome (Ep. 48) says
that in Egypt and Syria women who had dedicated themselves to^
God were accustomed to cut off their hair. He says: “ It is the
custom of the monasteries in Egypt and Syria , that both virgin and
widow who have vowed themselves to God , and have renounced and
trodden under foot all the delights of the world, \ should ojfer their hair
to be cut off, and afterwards live , not with head uncovered , which is
forbidden by the Apostle , but with their heads both tied round and
veiled? Palladius (in Lausiaca) is our authority for saying that the
Tabeunesiotae, an order of sacred virgins founded by S. Pachomius
in obedience to the command of an angel, did the same. Moreover,
S. Basil (in Reg. Monach. ) prescribes, that at the very beginning of
the monastic life the head should be shaven, for he says that this
well becomes him who is mourning for his sins.

Ver. 7. — For a man indeed ought not to cover his head \ inasmuch as
he is the image and glory of God This is a hendiadys, for man
is the image of the glory of God, or the glorious image of God, in
whom the majesty and power of God shine forth most clearly. He
is placed on the topmost step in nature, and is as it were God’s
vicegerent, ruling everything. This is the major of a syllogism of
which the minor is : but the glory of God must be manifested,
the glory of man hidden. Therefore, since woman is the glory of
the man, the man of God, it follows that woman should be veiled,
that the man should not. S. Anicetus (Ep. ad Episc. Gallia) takes
this verse of the Apostle chiefly of men in* the ranks of the clergy,
and of priests in particular, who, in obedience to S. Paul, ought not
only to have their heads uncovered, but also a tonsure in the shape
of a crown, as S. Peter had (Bede, Hist Ang. lib. v. c. 23, and
Greg, of Tours, de Glor. Conf c. xxvii.), to represent Christ’s crown
of thorns and the contumely endured by S. Peter and his fellow-
Apostles, from which they expect a crown of glory in the heavens.

It should be remarked that in the Old Testament the high-priest
offered sacrifices with bare feet and covered head, />., wearing his

Digitized by v^,ooQle

WOMAN THE GLORY' OF MAN

26l

mitre (Exod. xxviii. 37), but in the New Testament the priests offer
the sacrifice of the Mass with their feet shod and with uncovered
head. Epiphanius says (Hares. 80) that, in the New Testament,
Christ, who is our Head, is conspicuous and manifest to us, but was
veiled and hidden from the Jews in the Old Law. However, the
Apostle is evidently referring here to all men in general, not to the
clergy only.

It is not contrary to this precept of the Apostle for our priests,
when they celebrate, to use the amice among the other vestments,
for they do not cover the head with it while sacrificing, but only
use it round the opening in the chasuble (Rupert, de Div . Off.
lib. i. c. 10). The amice is not used, then, to cover the head, but
to represent the ephod of the high-priest under the Old Law, as
Alcuin and Rabanus say, or to signify the veil with which the Jews
bound the eyes of Christ (S. Matt, xxvl 67). Cf. Horn. Soto, lib. iv.
dist. 13, qu. 2, art. 4, and Hugh Viet de Sacr. lib. ii. c. 4.

But S. Paul wishes to abolish the heathen custom, first instituted,
say Plutarch and Servius, by ^Eneas, of sacrificing and making
supplication to their gods with veiled head. Tertuliian (in Apol.)
remarked this distinction between Christians and heathen, and Varro
(de Zing . Lat. lib. iv.) records that the Roman women, when sacrific-
ing, had their heads veiled in the same way.

But the woman is the glory of the man. Woman was made of
man to his glory, as his workmanship and image; therefore she is
subject to him, and should be veiled, in token of her subordination.

The woman, that is the wife, is the glory of the man, his glorious
image, because God formed Eve out of the man, in his likeness, so
that the image might represent the man, as a copy the model. This
image is seen in the mind and reason, inasmuch as the woman,
like the man, is endowed with a rational soul, with intellect, will,
memory, liberty, and is, equally with the man, capable of every
degree of wisdom, grace, and glory. The woman, therefore, is the
image of the man, but only improperly ; for the woman, as regards
the rational sou), is man’s equal, and both man and woman have been
made in the image of God ; but the woman was made from the man,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

262 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

after him, and is inferior to him, and created like him merely.
Hence the Apostle does not say that “ the woman is the image of
the man,” but only “the woman is the glory of the man.” The
reason is no doubt the one that Salmeron has pointed out, that
woman is a notable ornament of man, as given to him for a means
to propagate children and govern his family, and as the material
over which he may exercise his jurisdiction and dominion. For
man’s dominion not only extends to inanimate things and brute
animals, but also to rational beings, viz., to women and wives.

Vers. 8, 9. — For the man is not of the woman . . . but the woman
for the man. By two reasons he proves that the woman is the glory
of man as her head — (1.) that woman is of later date than man, pro-
duced from him, and consequently man is the source and principle
from which woman sprang. (2.) She was created to be a help to
the man, the sharer of his life, and the mother of his children. As,
then, man is the beginning from which, so is he the end for which
woman was made. Hence the woman is the glory of the man, and
not vice versd .

Ver. 10. — For this cause ought the woman to have power on her
head because of the angels . There is no good authority for reading
“ veil ” instead of “power,” as some do. We should observe : (1.)
Power denotes here the authority, right, or rule of the man over the
woman, not of the woman herself. The reference is to Gen. iii. 16.
(2.) Power , by metonymy, signifies here the symbol of the man’s
power, the veil which the woman wears on her head to signify her
subjection to her husband’s power, and to denote that the man, as it
were, is enthroned upon and holds dominion over her head. Power
here, then, is used with an active meaning with regard to the man,
with a passive in regard to the woman ; for a veil is worn by one
who reverences the power of another. As a bare and unconstrained
head is a sign of power and dominion, so when veiled it is a sign
that this power of his is as it were veiled, fettered, and subdued to
another. Hence Tertullian (de Cor. Mil. c. xiv.) calls this covering
worn by women, “The burden of their humility,” and (de Vel. Virg.
c. xvii.) “their yoke.” S. Chrysostom calls it “The sign of sub-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SYMBOLISM OF VEIL

263

jection;” the Council of Gangra >(sess. xvii.), “The memorial of
subjection.” (3.) From this covering it was that, by the Latins,
women are said nubere , that is, caput obnubere , when they pass into
the power of a husband. On the other hand, in the case of a man,
a cap was the badge of the freedman, as Livy says at the end of
lib . 45. Hence slaves who were to be enrolled as liable to military
service, were said to be called “ to the cap,” that is, to liberty.

Because of the angels . 1. The literal sense is that women ought

to have a covering on the head out of reverence to the angels ; not
because angels have a body, and can be provoked to lust, as Justin,
Clement, and Tertullian thought — this is an error I exposed in the
notes to Gen. vi. — but because angels are witnesses of the honest
modesty or the immodesty of women, as also of their obedience or
disobedience. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Theodoret, S. Thomas,
Anselm.

2. Clement (. Hypotypos , lib. ii.) understands by “angels,” good
and holy men.

3. Ambrose, Anselm, and S. Thomas take it to mean priests and
Bishops, who, iri Rev. ii., are called angels, and who might be pro-
voked to lust by the beauty of women with uncovered heads. Hence
Clement of Alexandria {Peed. lib. ii. c. 10) thinks that this bids them
cover, not merely their heads, but also their forehead and face, as we
see the more honourable do in church. But the first meaning is
the most literal and pertinent.

This reverence that is due to the angels is the third reason given
by S. Paul why women should cover their heads. It is especially
to be shown in church, for angels fill the church, and take notice of
the gestures, prayers, and dress of every one present. Hear what
S. Nilus relates happened to his master, S. Chrysostom, not once or
twice {Ep. ad Anast.). He says : “John, the most reverend priest of
the Church at Constantinople , and the light of the whole world \ a man
of great discernment , saw almost always the house of the Lord filled
with a great company of angels , and especially whilst he was offering
the holy and unbloody sacrifice ; and it was soon after this that he,
full of amazement and joy , related what he had seen to his chief friends.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

264 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

* When the priest had begun / he said f ‘ the most holy sacrifice , many of
these powers immediately descended \ clad in the most beautiful robes ,
barefooted, \ and with rapt look, and with great reverence silently pro-
strated themselves around the altar , until the dread mystery was
fulfilled, \ Then they dispersed hither and thither through the whole
building , and kept close to the bishops , priests , and deacons , as they dis-
tributed the precious body and bloody doing all they could to help them.’”
S. Chrysostom himself {Horn, de Sac . Mensd) says in amazement :
“At the altar cherubim stand ; to it descend the seraphim , endowed
with six wings and hiding their faces . There the whole host of angels
joins the priest in his work of ambassador for you” S. Ambrose,
commenting on the first chapter of S. Luke, speaks of the angel who
appeared to Zacharias, and says : “ May the angel be present with us as
we continually serve at the altar , and bring down the sacrifice ; nay 9
would that he would show himself to our bodily eyes . Doubt not that
the angel is present when Christ comes down and is immolated ” S.
Gregory (Dial. lib. iv. c. 58) says : “ Which of the faithful doubts
that at the moment of immolation^ the heavens are opened at the voice
of the priest \ that the choirs of angels are present in this mystery of
Jesus Christ ; that the lowest are joined to the highest , things earthly
with divine , that things visible and invisible become one ? ” S. Diony-
sius Areopagites (Coelest. Hierarch, c. v. and ix.), says that angels of
the highest order preside over the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the
administration of the sacraments. Tertullian (de Orat c. xiii.), cen-
suring the custom of sitting during the Mass, says : " If indeed it is
a mark of irreverence to sit down under the very eyes of one whom you
fear and reverence , , how much more impious is it to do so in the sight
of the living God t while the angel of prayer is still standing l IVhat
else is it but to insult God because we are tired of praying l” John
Moschus (in Prato Spir. c. 50) relates that a Roumeiian Bishop,
when celebrating Mass in the presence of Pope Agapitus, suddenly
stopped, because he did rot see as usual the descent of the Holy
Spirit; and when the Pope asked him why he stopped, he said,
“ Remove the deacon from the altar who holds the fly-flap.” When
this had been done, the wonted sign was given, and he finished the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

“BECAUSE OF THE ANGELS 99 265

sacrifice. Metaphrastes ( Vitd S. Chrys.) says that the same thing
happened to S. Chrysostom, through a deacon casting his eyes on
a woman.

We should note (1.), that out of modesty and dignified reserve
head-coverings were worn in the time before Christ by the women
of Judaea, Troy, Rome, Arabia, and Sparta. Valerius Maximus
(lib. vl c. 3) relates the severe punishment inflicted by C. Sulpicius
on his wife : he divorced her because he had found her out of doors
with uncovered head. Tertullian (de Vel. Virg. c. xiii). says: “ The
Gentile women of Arabia will rise up and judge us y for they cover, not
only the heady but also the whole face, leaving only one eye to serve for
both, rather than sell the whole face to every wanton gaze.” And
again (de Cor. Milit. c. iv.) he says : “ Among the Jewish women , so
customary is it to wear a head-covering that they may be kncnvn by it”
As to the Spartan women, Plutarch (Apophth. Lacon.) records that
it was the custom for their maidens to go out in public unveiled,
but married women veiled. The reason was that the one might so
find husbands, while those who already had husbands might not
seek to attract the attention of other men. But, as Clement of Alex-
andria says (Pcedag. lib. ii. c. 10), that it is a reproach to the Spartans
that they wore their dress down to the knee only, so neither are their
maidens to be praised for going forth in public with unveiled face, for
in that way maiden modesty was lost by being put up for sale.

2. Tertullian (de Vel. Virg. c. ii.) blames those women who used
a thin veil, because it was a provocation to lust rather than a pro-
tection to modesty, and was borrowed more from the custom of
Gentile women than of believers in Christ. In chapter xii. he calls
those women who consulted their mirrors for evidence of their
beauty, sellers of their chastity. Moreover, S. Justin, writing to
Severus (de Vitd Christ.) , hints plainly enough that Christians at that
time abhorred mirrors. In short, Tertullian wrote a treatise (de Vel.
Virg.) on this very point, to prove that all women, married or un-
married, religious or secular, should be veiled, any custom to the
contrary notwithstanding, because so the Apostle enjoins. The Cor-
inthians he says, (cap. 4), so understood S. Paul, and up to that time

Digitized by Google

266 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

kept their maidens veiled. Moreover, the reasons given by the
Apostle apply to all women alike, so that any breach of the precept
ought to be censured and corrected. In some places, eg, maidens
go abroad with the head wholly uncovered, to show their beauty and
attract a husband, when all that they really do is to peril the chastity
of themselves and others, and to expose themselves daily to the wiles
of panders, and hence we see and hear of so many shipwrecks to
chastity.

Let, then, a maiden be veiled, and go abroad covered, lest she see
herself what she ought not, or others be too much attracted by her
features. For those who have ruined themselves, or slain others
through the eye, are not to be numbered, and therefore the greatest
watch should be kept over the eyes. Hence Tertullian ( de VeL
Virg. c. 15), says : “ Every public display of a maiden is a violation
of her chastity ,” no doubt meaning that any one who walks about
freely with roving eyes and exposed face, to see and be seen, is
easily robbed of the purity of her mind. This very want of control
is an index that the mind is not sufficiently chaste. Hence Tertullian
goes on to say : “Put on the armour of shame, thrmv around thee the
rampart of modesty, raise a wall about thy sex which will suffer neither
thy eyes to go out nor those of others to come in”

3. The head-dress of sacred virgins formerly consisted of a bridal-
veil, of which Tertullian {de VeL Virg. c. 15) says : “ Pure virginity
is ever timid , and flies from the sight of men, flees for protection to its
head-covering as its helmet against the attacks of temptation, the darts
of scandal, against suspicions and back-bitings .” He adds that it was
usual to solemnly bless these veils, whence the virgins were said to
be wedded to God. Innocent I. {ad Victric. Ep . ii. c. 12) says too :
“ These virgins are united to Christ in spiritual wedlock, and are veiled
by priests ” These virgins lastly were clad in a dark-coloured dress,
and covered with a long cloak. On the other hand Lucian, ( Philo -
pater) thus satirises the first dress of Christian men : “ A sorry cloak,
bare head, hair cut short, no shoes.” They went then bare-footed,
or at all events like the Capuchins, wearing only sandals.

Ver. 1 1. — Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither

Digitized by v^,ooQle

INTERDEPENDENCE OF MAN AND WOMAN 267

the woman without the man , in the Lord \ This is to be referred to
ver. 9, not to the words immediately preceding, which by some
Bibles are rightly put in a parenthesis. Having said, in ver. 9, that
the woman was created for the man, the Apostle, lest he might seem
to have given to men an occasion for pride, to women of indignation,
here softens the force of it by adding that in marriage neither can
man be without woman nor woman without man. Each needs the
other’s help, and that “ in the Lord,” that is, by the will and disposi-
tion of the Lord. Cf. S. Ambrose and the following verse.

“ In the Lord ” may also be understood “ in Christ, by Christian
truth and law.” The rule of Christian law and of God’s ordinance
is that the husband and wife give mutual help, procreate children,
and educate them piously. This seems to be a reminder to married
people of their duty to each other, and of Christian piety.

Ver. 12. — As the woman is of the man , &c. The first woman,
Eve, was formed from man ; man is conceived, formed, bom, propo-
gated through woman : all is done, ordered, and disposed by God.

Ver. 14.— Doth not even nature itself teach you l The Latin
Version reads, “ Neither doth nature itself teach you,” Nature
doth not teach that women should be veiled, but it does teach
that if a man grow long hair, it is a disgrace to him ; if a woman, it
is her glory.

Ver. 15. — But if a woman have long hair it is a glory to her . To
let the hair grow long is contrary to what becomes man, is the
mark of a weak and effeminate mind, unless it is done because
of ill-health or intense cold. Hence S. Augustine reproves some
monks who wore their hair down to their shoulders, to gain the
appearance and reputation of holiness ( de Op . Monach .). Again, it
seems fitting for a man to pray with uncovered head, for a woman
with covered, as the Apostle has proved here. The woman ought,
therefore, to let her hair grow long, but not the man, for her hair
was given her for her covering.

Take note, however, that it is not absolutely enjoined, either by
natural, Divine, or ecclesiastical law, that a woman should let her
hair grow long and man should not. Hence, as was said in the

. Digitized by v^,ooQle

263 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

notes to ver. 6, religious women cut off their hair. On the other
hand, the men of some tribes, like the Gauls, used to let their hair
grow long for an ornament. Hence we get the name of Gallia
Comata, Homer, too, frequently speaks of the “ long-haired
Achaeans.” The Romans, also, in ancient times, grew their hair
long, and did not apply the scissors till the time of Scipio Africanus.
Pliny says {lid, vii. c. 59) that the first barbers came into Italy from
Sicily, a.u.c. 454. Lycurgus also enacted that the Lacedaemonians
should retain their hair. S. Paul, therefore, is not laying down any
rule, but merely points to the teaching of nature, that it is fitting
for a woman, when she goes out in public, to go with bonnet and
veil, but not for a man. Still, he here adopts the decency taught
by nature, and wishes the Corinthians to observe it as if it were a
precept, hence he adds —

Ver. 16. — But if any man seem to be contentious. To be conten-
tious is to contend for renown and victory, not for truth ; and here
it is to contend that Christian women should not be veiled when
they pray in Church, but should be bareheaded, according to the
ancient custom of the heathen.

Ver. 17 . — Now in this that I declare unto you, I praise you not , &c.
This is the fourth reason why women should be veiled, drawn from
nature itself, which has given woman hair for a covering, to teach
her that she ought to cover herself. The Apostle says, “In giving
you this precept about the veiling of women, I do not, at the same
time, praise you for coming together, not for the better but for the
worse.” What this means is explained in the next verse.

Ver. 18. — For first of all ... / hear that there be divisions among
you. Observe the word “Church,” which shows that, in the time
of S. Paul, there were places set apart for worship. For the early
form of churches, their paintings, use of the Cross, the separation
of the sexes, &c., see Baronius in his commentary on this verse.

The Apostle here passes from the subject of the veiling of women
to correct the abuses of the Corinthians in the Eucharist.

For there must also be heresies among you . Looking at the fickle-
ness, pride, newness in the faith, and quarrelsomeness of the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE LORD'S SUPPER

269

Corinthians, who were saying, “ I am of Paul, I of A polios,” which
God permitted to prove them, it was necessary that there should
be heresies. So Cajetan, Ambrose, Chrysostom. “ Heresies ” here
denotes the divisions on points of faith and manners, which ex-
isted among the Corinthians about the Eucharist, e.g., where they
should sit, when the Supper should begin, about the food and
drink, about the persons they should sit down with. In the Lord’s
Supper and the agapse, the rich Corinthians excluded the poor and
had their meat by themselves.

That they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
In the time of heresy and schism, we see who are built on the
foundation of faith and piety, as here amongst the Corinthians was
seen the patient constancy of the poor, who were scorned by the
rich, and also the modesty and charity of the rich who hated
divisions, and invited the poor to their feasts and their agapae. So
Chrysostom, Theophylact, (Ecumenius.

Ver. 20. — When ye come together , therefore, into one place, this is not
to eat the Lord's supper. When you come together in this way to
the Eucharist and the supper of the Lord, your supper is no longer
that of the Lord, as it once was ; and your eating is no longer an
eating of the Lord's Supper. You do not institute a supper of the
Lord, who admitted to His sober and holy meal all the Apostles,
including even Judas, but a supper to Bacchus or Mars; for you
come together to get drunk, and to exclude the poor, and so each
one fills himself with wine, and the poor with violence. So Anselm,
Chrysostom, Theophylact, Vatablus, and Erasmus read for “it is
not,” “ it is not lawful,” i.e., “ it is not lawful for you to eat the Lord's
Supper, and for this reason.” But the first meaning is more thorough,
more forcible, and better reproves the Corinthians.

Ver. 21. — For in eating every one takeih before other his own
supper. (1.) S. Augustine ( Ep . 118) understands this to mean that
they took their supper before they came to the Eucharist, and that
ver. 33 orders them to wait for one another at the supper be-
fore the Eucharist ; because at the Eucharist itself or after it there
was no need of waiting, since it was not celebrated till all had

Digitized by v^,ooQle

270 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

assembled, when the poor would receive it mingled indiscrimi-
nately with the rich.

We must remark that, at the time of S. Paul, in imitation of
Christ, who, after the common meal on the Passover lamb, instituted
the Eucharist, the Christians instituted before the Eucharist a meal
common to all, rich and poor alike, in token of their mutual Christian
charity. This custom lasted in some Churches for several centuries.
As late as the time of Sozomen, as he relates {Hist lib. vii. c. 29),
it was the custom in many towns and villages of Egypt, first to take
a meal in common, and then, following Christ’s example, celebrate
and partake of the Holy Eucharist The Third Council of Carthage
(can. 29) points to the same custom as prevailing in several other
Churches. The Apostle does not here censure this custom wherever
or whenever it was allowed, but only the abuse of it by those who
got drunk in this supper, and allowed others who were poor to go
hungry. Hence he says, “ One is hungry and another is drunken ; ”
and again he says, that a man will be guilty of the body and blood
of the Lord who eats unworthily, in the mortal sin of drunken-
ness and contempt of the poor. He therefore, in ver. 33, bids them
wait for one another when they eat the Lord’s Supper. He speaks,
therefore, of the assembly which took place before, not after the
Eucharist.

2. Others, however, think that " the supper taken before ” is the
agape after the Eucharist In the primitive Church, in imitation
of Christ, the richer members were in the habit of spreading a feast
for rich and poor alike after the Holy Communion, in token of love,
whence it was called the “ agape ; ” but as charity grew cold and
the number of the faithful increased, the practice became abused;
for the rich would spread their own table sumptuously, even getting
intoxicated, and would sit apart by themselves, the poor being ex-
cluded or not expected, far less invited, as ver. 33 implies, and it is
this that the Apostle here censures. Cf. Chrysostom {Horn, xxiii.
Moral\ Tertullian {Afot 29), and Baronius in loco . It was for this
reason that the Council of Laodicea (can. 28) abolished the agape.

But the former explanation seems the better for the reasons given

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ABUSE OF THE AGAPE

271

above; for the agape in S. Paul's time was held, not after but
before the Eucharist ; although shortly after these early days, when
the Church laid down that, out of reverence, the Eucharist should
be received fasting only, the agape was kept after the Eucharist, as
will be seen by reference to the passages of Tertullian and Chry-
sostom, quoted above, and to S. Augustine ( Ep . 118). By parity of
reasoning this passage of S. Paul can be applied to those of the rich
who celebrated the agape after the Eucharist; for he censures
drunkenness and pride in the agape, whether before or after the
Eucharist Wherefore some Protestants are wrong in twisting this
verse into an argument against private Masses, in which the priest
alone communicates, merely because no one else wishes to com-
municate; for others are not excluded, nay, the Church wishes
(Council of Trent, sess. xxii. can. 6 and 8) those who hear Mass to
communicate. For the Apostle is not referring to this, nor is he
speaking of the Eucharist at all, but of the common meal called the
agape, as I have shown.

Ver. 22. — What 1 have ye not houses to eat and to drink ini &c.
Why do you put to shame the poor who have not your wealth, and
cannot contribute the delicacies which you can to the common
meal? If you wish to feast and enjoy yourselves, do it at home
among your equals, not in the church. For if you do it in church
you sin in two ways: (1.) because you defile the church by your
self-indulgence ; (2.) because, by neglecting and despising the poor,
you rend the Christian Church, which is common to rich and poor.

Ver. 23. — That which also I delivered unto you. Not by writing,
as I said before, but by word of mouth. This is one authority for
the traditions which, orthodox divines teach, should be added to the
written word of God.

Vers. 23, 24. — That the Lord Jesus the same night , &c. Five
actions of Christ are here described: (1.) He took bread; (2.) He
gave thanks to the Father ; (3.) He blessed the bread, as S. Matthew
also says (xxvi. 26) ; (4.) He brake it ; (5.) He gave it to His disciples,
and in giving it, He said, " Take, eat ; this is My body.” These are
the words of one who gives as well as of one who consecrates.

Digitized by Google

272 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

Hence there is no foundation for the argument of Calvin, who
says that all these words “ took,” “ blessed,” “ brake,” “ gave,” refer to
bread only, and that therefore it was bread that the Apostles took and
ate, not the body of Christ. My answer is that these words refer to
the bread, not as it remained bread, but as it was changed into the
body of Christ while being given, by the force of the words of
consecration used by Christ. In the same way Christ might have
said at Cana of Galilee, “ Take, drink ; this is wine,” if He had wished
by these words to change the water into wine. So we are in the
habit of saying, Herod imprisoned, slew, buried, or permitted to be
buried, S. John, when what he buried was not what he imprisoned :
he imprisoned a man ; he buried a corpse. Like this, and conse-
quently just as common, is this way of speaking about the Eucharist,
which is used by the Evanglists and S. PauL

Notice too from Christ’s words, “ Take, for this is,” &c. that He
seems to have taken one loaf, and in the act of consecration to have
broken it into twelve parts, and to have given one part to each
Apostle, and that each one seems to have received it into his hand.
Hence the custom existed for a long time in the Church of giving
the Eucharist into the hands of the faithful, as appears from Ter-
tullian (de Spectac .), from Cyril of Jerusalem ( Myst . Catech. 5),
from S. Augustine ( Serm . 44). Afterwards, however, it was put into
the mouth to prevent accidents, and out of reverence.

This is My body . Heretics say that this is a figure of speech, a
metonymy, or something of the sort, and that the meaning is, “ This
is a figure of My body,” “ This represents My body.”

But that this is no mere figure of speech is evident (1.) from the
emphasis on the word “ This? and from the words, “ My body and
and My blood,” as well as from the whole sentence, which is so
clearly expressed that it could not have been put more plainly. Add
to this that the words were used on the last day of Christ’s life, at
the time that He left His testament, instituted a new and everlasting
covenant with His unlettered and beloved disciples, and also insti-
tuted this most sublime sacrament, at once a dogma and a Christian ,
mystery, all which things men generally express as they ought to

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE

273

do in the clearest terms possible. Who can believe that the great
wisdom and goodness of Christ would have given in His last words
an inevitable occasion for false doctrine and never-ending idolatry?
— which He surely did if these so clear words, “ This is My body,”
were meant to be understood merely as a figure of speech. If this is
indeed true, then the whole Church, for the last 1500 years, has been
living in the most grievous error and idolatry, and that too through
Christ’s own words, which Luther thought so clear that he wrote to
the men of Argentum : “ If Carlstadt could have persuaded me that
in the sacrament there is nothing but bread and wine, he would have
conferred a great kindness upon me ; for so I should have been most
utterly opposed to the Papacy . But I am held fast : there is no way of
escape open ; for the text of the Gospel is too apparent and too convincing ,
its force cannot well be evaded , ’ much less can it be destroyed by words
or glosses forged in some brain-sick head” And Melancthon (ad Fred \
Myconium) says : “ If you understand ‘ My body f to mean * a figure of
My body? what difficulty is there that you will not be able to explain
away ? It will then be easy to transform the whole form of religion”
With Servetus, you will be able to say that Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are but three names of the one God, not Three Persons ; that
Christ took flesh, but only in appearance ; that He died and suffered,
but only as a phantasm, as the Manichaeans teach. In short, in this
way who will not be able to say that the Gospel is the Gospel, Christ
is Christ, God is God figuratively, and so come, as many do, to
believe nothing at all ? Observe how the Sacramentaries open here
a door to atheism. Cardinal Hosius most truly prophesied that
heretics would in course of time become atheists, and that the end
of all heresy is atheism. When they fall away from Catholic truth
into heresy, and find in that nothing fixed, or firm, or durable, what
remains for them but to abjure their heretical opinions and believe
nothing, and become that of which the Psalmist sings (xiv. 1), “The
fool hath said in his heart, There is no God ? ” Would that we did
not daily see the truth of this.

Again, not only Paul, but Matthew, Mark, and Luke record the

institution in the same way and in the same words : “ This is My,

VOL. L S

Digitized by Google

274 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

body ; this is My blood.” Not one, then, can say it is a figure of
speech, or maintain that one explains the other where he is obscure.
Erasmus was convinced by this argument, and replied to the attempts
of Conrad Pellican to convert him to Zwinglianism : “ I have always
said that I could never bring my mind to believe that the true body of
Christ was not in the Eucharist \ especially when the writings of the
Evangelists and S. Paul expressly speak of the body as given and of the
blood as shed. . . . Jfyou have persuaded yourself that in Holy Com -
munion you receive nothing but bread and wine , / would rather under -
go all kinds of suffering, and be torn limb from limb, than profess what
you do ; nor will I suffer you to make me a supporter or associate of
your doctrine ; and so may it be my portion nner to be separated from
Christ Amen .”

2. If in the Eucharist bread remains bread, then the figure of bread
has succeeded to the figure of the lamb. Who is there that does not
see that it is wrong to say that that can be ? The lamb slain under
the Old Law was a plainer representation of Christ suffering than
the bread in the New Law. Again, the lamb would have been a poor
type of the Eucharist if it is, as Calvin says, bread and nothing else.
Any one would rather have the lamb, both for itself and as a figure
of Christ, than the bread.

3. This is still more evident in the consecration of the cup : “ This
is My blood of the new testament, which is shed for you ” — words
which are clearest of all in S. Luke xxii. 20 — “This cup is the new
testament in My blood, which is shed for you.” The relative in
this verse undoubtedly refers to “cup.” S. Luke, therefore, says
that the cup, or the chalice of the blood of Christ, was poured out
for us; therefore, in this chalice there was truly the blood of
Christ, so that, when this chalice was drunk from, there was poured
out, not wine, which was before consecration, and, as heretics say,
remains after consecration also, but the blood of Christ, which was
contained in it after consecration ; for this is the meaning of “ the
cup of My blood which is poured out for you.” Otherwise it was
a cup of wine, not of blood, that was poured out for us, and Christ
would have redeemed us with a cup of wine, which is most absurd.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE

275

This will still more plainly appear from the next verse. Nor can
it be said, as Beza does, that the text is corrupt, for all copies and
commentators read it as we do, and always have so read it

4. All the Evangelists and S. Paul explain what “this body”
means by adding, “which is given for you,” or, as S. Paul says,
“which is broken for you.” But it was not the figure of the body,
but the true body of Christ that was given and broken for us;”
therefore it was the true body of Christ that Christ gave to His
Apostles. Moreover, S. Paul says : “ Whosoever shall eat this bread
. . . unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.”
Therefore there is here really “ the body and blood of the Lord,”
and he who handles and takes it unworthily does it an injury.

In short, the Greek and Latin Fathers of all ages explain these
words of consecration literally. This was how the Church under-
stood them for 1050 years, till the time of Berengarius. He was
the first who publicly taught the contrary, being a man untaught
indeed, but ambitious of obtaining the name of a new teacher.
For J. Scotus and Bertram, who, at an earlier date, held the same
views as Berengarius, were but little known, and were at once refuted
and silenced by Paschasius Radbert, and others. This opinion of
Berengarius was at once opposed as a dogma that had seen light
for the first time by Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, Guidmund,
Alger, and the whole Catholic Church. The error of Berengarius
was condemned at a council held at Versailles, under Leo IX., and
at another held at Tours, under Victor II., at which Berengarius was
present, and being convicted, he at once abjured his heresy, but
having relapsed, he was once more convicted in a Roman council
of 1 13 bishops, under Nicholas II., and his books were burnt
Having again lapsed, he condemned his error in a third Roman
council, under Gregory VII., and uttered the following confession of
faith given by Thomas Wald, (de Sacram. voL ii. c. 43) : “I, Beren -
garius , believe with my heart and profess with my mouth that the
bread and wine are changed into the true and real and lifegiving
flesh and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ , and that , after consecration,
there is His true body which he took of the Virgin , and that there is

Digitized by v^,ooQle

276 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, c. XI.

the very blood which flowed from His side , not merely by way of sign y
but in its natural properties , and in reality of substance” Would
that those who follow Berengarius now in his error would follow
him also in his repentance. The heresy of Berengarius has been
renewed in the present century by Andrew Carlstadt, who was at
once opposed by Luther. Carlstadt was followed by Zwingli, he
by Calvin; and yet there is no single article of faith which has
such firm support of all the Fathers and of the whole Church as
this of the reality of the body of Christ in the Eucharist.

The same truth has been defined in eight General Councils — the
First and Second Nicene, the Roman under Nicholas II., the Lateran,
those of Vienne, of Constance, Florence, and Trent, as well as by
many provincial synods. If any one doubts this, let him read John
Garetius, who gives in order the testimonies of the Fathers for sixteen
centuries after Christ, and of the Councils of each century, who
alike unanimously and clearly confess this truth. He also brings
forward the profession of the same faith given by the Churches of
Syria, Ethiopia, Armenia, and India. Let him read also Bellarmine
(de Eucharistid ), who gives and comments on the words of each.
Whoever reads them will see that this has been the faith of the
Church in all ages, so that Erasmus might well say to Louis Beer :
“ You will never persuade me that Christy who is Truth and Love ,
would so long suffer His beloved bride to remain in so abominable an
error as to worship a piece of bread instead of Himself ”

And here appears the art and ingenuity of Zwingli, Calvin, and
their friends. They bring forward a new view of the Eucharist, and
teach that in it there is not really the body of Christ, but merely a
figure of the body. How do they prove it ? From the Scriptures.
Well, then, let the words be studied, let all the Evangelists be read,
let Paul too be read, and let it be said whether they support them
or us and the received teaching of the Church. What else do all
clearly proclaim but a body, and that a body given for us ? What
else but blood shed for us ? Where here is room for shadow, or
figure, or type? But they say these words must be explained figura-
tively. Admit, then, that the words of Scripture do not favour you,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE

2 77

for you say that the mind of Scripture is to be ascertained elsewhere
than from the words of Scripture. How, then, do you prove that
these words ought to be explained figuratively? If they are am-
biguous, whence is the exposition to be sought ? Who is to end the
strife save the Church, which is the pillar and ground of the truth
handed down to her from the Fathers? What save the primitive
authority of the Fathers, the tradition of our forefathers, and the
consent of the first ages of the Church ? We quote and allege the
Fathers of every century, all our forefathers, the national and
General Councils of each century : all take the words of Christ as they
stand, and condemn the figurative interpretation. What remains,
then, but to follow the plain words of Scripture, and the clear ex-
position of the Fathers and of the whole Church in all ages ? And
yet you obstinately adhere to your figurative explanation. What Scrip-
ture supports you — whose authority — what reason ? You can only
say that your heresy has so determined, and that you follow the
trumpet of Luther. So I think, so I choose, so I will, so I deter-
mine : let my will do instead of reason. This is the only ground
you have for all your beliefs.

Melancthon wrote far more truly and more soundly about this
{de Ver. Corp . et Sang . Dom.): “Jf relying on human reason , , you
deny that Christ is in the Eucharist \ what will your conscience say
in time of trial ? What reason will it bring forward for departing
from the doctrine received in the Church ? Then will the words , ‘ This
is My body / be thunderbolts . What will your panic-stricken mind
oppose to them ? By what words of Scripture , by what promises of
God will she fortify herself and persuade herself that these words must
necessarily be taken metaphorically , when the Word of God ought to be
listened to before the judgment of reason ?” At all events in the hour
of death, and in that terrible day when we stand before the tribunal
of Christ, to be examined of our life and faith, if Christ ask me, “ Why
didst thou believe that My body was in the Eucharist?” I can
confidently answer, " I believed it, O Lord, because Thou saidst it,
because Thou didst teach it me. Thou didst not explain Thy words
as a figure, nor did I dare to explain them so. The Church took

Digitized by Google

278 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

them in their simple meaning, and I took them as the Church did.
I was persuaded that this faith and this reverence were due from me
to Thy words and to Thy Church.’'

If Christ ask the Calvinist, “ Why didst thou wrest My words from
their proper meaning into a figure of speech ?” what answer will he
make ? “I thought that I must do so, for my reason could not
understand how they could or ought to be true.” — “ But,” He will
reply, “ which ought you to have listened to — your reason, which has
human infirmity, or My word, which is all-powerful, than which nothing
can be truer ? Reason dictated to the Gentiles that to believe in
Me as God, when born, suffering, and crucified, was folly. Yet you
thought and believed that you should believe all this about Me, and
you were persuaded of it from the words of Scripture only, which
say this simply. Why, then, in this one article of the Eucharist did
you presume to interpret what I expressly said, by the rule of your
reason, according to the measure of your brain ? Why did you not
bow to the authoritative exposition of the Church of all ages? Why
desire to be wiser than it ? ” What answer will he give — how excuse
himself — whither turn ? Let each one think earnestly of this ere it
be too late, let him submit himself to God’s word and the Church
with humble and loyal obedience, lest he be confounded in that day
of the Lord, and receive his lot with the unbelievers in the lake of
fire that burneth with fire and brimstone, lest he hear the words of
thunder, “ Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire.” Nor
let him marvel at such a wonderful mystery in the Eucharist, when
Christ, throughout His whole life, was wonderful for His mysteries
(Isa. ix. 6) ; and when Isaiah also says of Him (Isa. xlv. 6) : “Verily
Thou art a God that hidest Thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.”
If an angel should conceal himself under the form of the Host, he
would be really there though hidden ; you would see, touch, and
taste bread only, not an angel ; yet you would believe that an angel
was hidden beneath it if an angel or a prophet had said so. Why,
then, in like manner, do you not believe that Christ is concealed
under the Host, when Christ Himself, who cannot lie, says so ? For
God, who is Almighty, can supernaturally give this mode of exist-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE

2/9

ence — spiritual, invisible, indivisible — to the body of Christ in the
Eucharist. Let no one then faithlessly say : “ How can Christ be in
so small a Host?” Let him think that Christ is there, as an angel
might be ; let him not inquire as to the mode, but embrace instead the
wonderful love of Christ, whose delights are with the sons of men,
who went about to pass from the world to the Father ; as S. John says
(xiii. i), “having loved His own which were in the world, He loved
them unto the end ; ” and of whom says the verse of S. Thomas —

“ By birth their Fellow-man was He,

Their meat when sitting at the board ;

He died their Ransomer to be ;

He ever reigns, their great Reward ” —

that by His love He might compel our love in return, that as often
as we see and take our part in these mysteries we might think
of Him as addressing us in the words: “So Christ gives Him-
self here wholly to thee; give, nay give again thyself wholly to
Him.”

You will perhaps object that the Eucharist is called “ bread and
fruit of the vine,” wine, in S. John vi. 57, S. Matt. xxvi. 29. I
answer that in the account of the institution of the Eucharist it is
called bread by no one, if it is elsewhere, and also that “bread”
there denotes any kind of food. (See note on x. 17). So wine might
signify any kind of drink, as being the common drink among the
Jews, as it is now in Spain, Italy, France, and Germany.

But the better answer is that Christ applied the name “fruit of
the vine,” not to what was in the Eucharistic chalice, but to that in
the cup of the Passover Supper. For, as He said of the lamb (S.
Luke xxii. 16), “I will not eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the
Kingdom of God,” so of the cup of the lamb, “ I will not drink of
the fruit of the vine until the Kingdom of God shall come.” For
S. Luke plainly makes a distinction, not observed by S. Matthew and
S. Mark, between the lamb and the cup of the Passover supper, and
relates that Christ spoke of both before the Eucharist (xxii. 17).
Christ simply meant to say that He would not afterwards live with
them, or take part in the common supper, as He had hitherto done,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

280 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

because He was going to His death, as Jerome, Theophylact and
others say in their comments on the passage.

You may perhaps object, secondly, that the words, “This is My
body ” are a sacramental mode of speech, and are, therefore, typical
and figurative.

But I deny that this follows ; for this is a sacramental mode of
speech, because, by these words, a true sacrament is worked, viz.,
because, under the species of bread and wine as the visible signs,
there is present the very body of Christ. The words are not
sacramental in the sense of being typical or figurative, for sacraments
properly speaking signify what they contain and effect. For a sacra-
ment is a visible sign of an invisible reality which it causes and effects,
as, e.g. } when we say, “ I baptize thee,” 4< wash thee,” the meaning
is not, “ I give thee a sign or figure of washing,” but strictly, “ By this
sacrament I wash thy body, and by this I wash thy soul from the stains
of thy sins.” So when we say, " I absolve thee,” “ I confirm thee,”
“ I anoint thee,” there is signified, not a figurative but a real and proper
absolution, confirmation, and anointing of the body and soul.

If Christ, therefore, when He said “ body,” had meant “ figure of
My body,” He ought to have explained Himself, and said, “I am
speaking, not only sacramentally, but figuratively,” otherwise He would
have given to the Apostles and to the whole Church an evident occa-
sion for the most grievous error. The conclusion then has no basis
that Christ is in the Eucharist as in a sacrament, that is, figuratively
or typically, as the commentary ascribed to S. Ambrose says, in
which it is followed by some of the Fathers, and that therefore He
is not really there, but only figuratively; the contrary should be
inferred. Christ is not, therefore, there figuratively, but truly and
properly ; for a sacrament signifies what is really present, not what
is falsely absent As, then, the conclusion is valid that where there
is smoke there is fire, because smoke is the sign of the presence of
fire; and again this body breathes, therefore life is present in it,
because breathing is a sign of life, so also it rightly follows that the
body of Christ is in the Eucharist as in a Sacrament ; therefore, He
is really there, because the Sacrament and the sacramental species

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE

281

signify that they, as the true sacraments of Christ's body, truly
contain it.

You will object perhaps, thirdly, that Christ said (S. John vi. 63) : “It
is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing ; ” therefore
the flesh of Christ is not present, and is not eaten in the Eucharist

3. I answer that it cannot be said without impiety that the flesh
of Christ, suffering and crucified for us, profits us nothing. Indeed,
the very opposite of this is taught by Christ Himself throughout S.
John vi. 35-65. He says in so many words that His flesh greatly
profits us. His meaning therefore is, as S. Cyril points out, (1.) that
the flesh of Christ has not its quickening power in the Eucharist
from itself, but from the Spirit, that is from the Godhead of the
Word, to which it is hypostatically united. (2.) That this man-
ducation, as S. Chrysostom says, of Christ's flesh in the Eucharist is
not carnal : that we do not press it with our teeth, as we might
bull's flesh, but that we eat it after a spiritual manner, one suited to
the nature of spirit, viz., mysteriously, sacramentally, invisibly. For
you here eat the flesh of Christ in exactly the same way as you
would feed on and appropriate the substance of an angel, if he lay
concealed in the sacrament The opposite of this was what was
understood by the unspiritual people of Capernaum, and it is against
them only that Christ says these words. Hence He proceeds to say :

“ The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life."

In other words, “ They are spiritual, and must be understood spiri-
tually : you will not eat My flesh in the carnal sense of being bloody,
cut into pieces, and chewed, but only in a spiritual way, as though it
were a spirit couched invisibly and indivisibly beneath the Blessed
Sacrament In the same way, “ My words are life,” that is full of *
life, giving life to him that heareth, believeth, and eateth My flesh.

4. You will perhaps again urge that it seems impossible that Christ,
being so great, should be in so small a Host and at so many diffe-
rent altars, and that it seems incredible that Christ should be there,
subject to the chance of being eaten by mice or vomited, &c.

I reply to the first, " With God all things are possible.” Hence
we say, “I believe in God the Father Almighty.” God can do

Digitized by Google

282 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

more than a miserable man, nay, more than all the hosts of angels
and men can conceive, else He would not be God. Moreover,
faith transcends human capacity: these mysteries are matters for
faith, not for reason. “Faith,” says S. Augustine (in Joan, Tract,
27 and 40), “is believing what you see not.” And S. Gregory (in
Evang. Horn, xxvi.) says : “ Faith has no merit where human reason
supplies proof.” S. Thomas, therefore, well sings of this sacrament —

“ Faith alone, though sight forsaketh,

Shows true hearts the mystery.”

Moreover, it can be shown by a similar case that it is not im-
possible for the body of Christ to be in so small a Host ; for the
body of Christ was bora of the Virgin, i,e. t came forth from her
closed womb ; He therefore penetrated the Virgin’s womb in such
a way that when He was born He was in the same place as His
mother’s womb was. Similarly, Christ rose from the closed sep-
ulchre, and entered to His disciples when the doors were shut:
He was therefore in the same place as the stone before the tomb
and the door of the upper room.

Now I argue thus : If two whole bodies can be at once in the
same place, e.g,, Christ and the stone, so also two parts of the same
body, eg,, the head and feet of Christ, can be in the same place, as,
eg., in the same Host If two can be, then can three or four or five,
or as many as God shall see fit to put in the same place. Christ
says the same in S. Matt. xix. 24., in the words, “ It is easier for a
camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to
enter into the Kingdom of heaven.” But God can absolutely draw
a rich man to heaven, therefore He can make a camel go through
the eye of a needle, and therefore the body of Christ through so
small a Host.

Now, if two bodies can be in the same place, so, by parity of
reasoning, the same body, viz., that of Christ, can be in different
places and different Hosts ; for both are of equal difficulty and of
equal power.

We can show, thirdly, the possibility of this by another example ;

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE SACRAMENTAL PRESENCE

283

for God can make an angel, nay, an angel can make himself ex-
pand from filling a single point to fill a whole room; and on the
other hand He can make a body that is spread through some extent
of space contract to a single point. If He can do that, why not
this, especially since He is Almighty? for both belong to the
same order and present the same difficulty, nor does one involve
more contradiction than the other.

Further, not only does God do this in the case of an angel, who
is spirit and not body, but He does it also to bodies in the world
of nature. For fire will rarefy and expand water to ten times its
volume, nay, make it boil over and escape ; and, again, cold can so
condense this same water, when the heat of the fire is taken from
it, as to contract it to its original volume. Why, then, cannot God,
who infinitely surpasses the workings of nature, reduce the body of
Christ, which is but of six feet, to the dimensions of a single Host,
nay, of a single point ? As God can increase anything indefinitely, so
can He diminish it in the same way ; for both the infinite power
of God is requisite and sufficient.

Lastly, Christ compares Himself and His Gospel to a grain of
mustard-seed (S. Matt. xiii. 31), which, from being of small dimen-
sions, attains great size by its inherent vigour,' and spreads itself out
into wide-spreading branches, and becomes a large tree. If God
does this to a grain of mustard-seed by natural agencies, why can
He not do the like in the Eucharist according to His promise ?

2. As to the indignity offered to Christ, I reply that Christ suffers
nothing : it is the species alone that are affected. For Christ is here
after a mysterious and indivisible manner, as a spirit. As, then, an
angel who should enter the Host, or as God, who is in reality in
every body and every place, suffers nothing if the Host or the body
containing Him is vomited, burnt, or broken, so neither does the
body of Christ in the Eucharist suffer anything, because it is like
to an angel. Erasmus ( Prof, in lib. Algeri.) says : “ God, who,
according to nature, is as truly in the sewers as the skies, cannot
be hurt or defiled, nor can the glorified body of the Lord.” And
again {ad Conrad Pcllican ) he says : “ Up to the present, with all

Digitized by v^,ooQle

284 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

Christians I have adored in the Eucharist Christ , who suffered forme ,
nor do I yet see any reason why I should abandon my belief No human
reasons will ever have power to draw me away from the unanimous
belief of the Christian world. Those few words , 1 In the beginning
God created the heaven and the earth? have more weight with me
than all the arguments of Aristotle and the rest of the philosophers , by
which they strive to show that the heavens and the earth had no
beginning . So, too , here we have the words of God , 1 This is My body,
which is given for you? i This is My blood, which is shed for you? ”

I have dealt with these objections at some length, because of the
importance of their subject, and because of the modern Protestant
controversies, which, I observe, are causing some of our neighbours,
and especially the Dutch, to swerve from the ancient orthodox faith,
because of the supposed difficulty or incredibility of this article of
the Eucharist, when, as a fact, there is no other article in Holy Scrip-
ture, the Fathers, or councils so firmly fixed as this is.

From what has been said, it appears (1.) that in the Eucharist the
species of bread does not remain, but is transubstantiated into the
body of Christ, as the wine is into His blood, as the Lateran Council
lays down, and as the Church has always held. Consequently it
also appears (2.) that the accidents only of the bread and wine
remain without a subject, and (3.) that the body of Christ is present
after the manner of a spiritual substance, invisible, indivisible, the
whole in the whole and the whole in each part of the host, as is
thought universally by theologians. Let us now weigh the meaning
of the words of consecration.

This . This pronoun is not so much a substantive denoting an
indefinite individual (as some think it to stand for “this thing/*
or “ what is contained under these species,” whether bread or the
body of Christ) as it is an adjective signifying the same thing
indeterminately, as “My body” signifies distinctly and by name.
Similarly, when we say, “This is a servant,” “This is a man,” the
word “ this ” merely points out the servant or the man in an indeter-
minate way. You will perhaps reply that when Christ said “ this,”
it was not yet the body of Christ, and therefore the word cannot

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE WORDS OF INSTITUTION

285

stand for it I answer that, as this is a form of consecration, the
words are not enuntiative but efficacious, and that, therefore, the word
“this ” refers to that which is not yet, but which comes through the
use of the formula, and will be there when that has been said.

Perhaps you will urge again: This efficacious form of words
signifies, This is transubstantiated into My body: therefore this
refers to the bread; for it is the bread alone that is so transub-
stantiated. I deny the major, viz., that transubstantiation is here
signified primarily and directly. Primarily there is only signified
that the body of Christ is made to be present in such a way that
when the species is signified, so too is the body ; it then follows
secondarily, that the bread is transubstantiated and annihilated.
Still, if you wish to explain “this is” indirectly, as meaning “This
is transubstantiated into My body,” then I grant that it refers to
the bread. It is no wonder if this pronoun stands for two diffe-
rent things, because the one proposition, “This is My body,” is
of manifold meaning, efficacious, enuntiative, nay, efficacious in a
twofold way.

But to clearly understand all this, take notice that if Christ had
taken the species only of bread without the substance, and had then
consecrated it, nay, if He had taken not even the species but had
created it, as He consecrated, out of nothing, by saying, “ This is
My body,” then primarily He would have done just what He did when
He took the bread and consecrated it and said, “ This is My body.”
But in the two supposed cases He would not have transubstantiated
anything, for no substance of bread would have been there before,
nor would the pronoun “ this ” have referred to bread or any other
substance, but only to the body of Christ, which would be simply
produced ; therefore in our last case, and in the actual consecration,
there is not primarily signified transubstantiation, nor does “this”
refer to the bread but to the body of Christ

Similarly, when God created the heaven, He could have said,
“ This is heaven,” *"*., this is created and brought into being, and
is heaven ; “ This is earth,” /.<?., this is created, is produced, and at
the same time, by these very words, the earth is; “This is Eve,”

Digitized by v^,ooQle

286 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

she is produced, and at the very instant that she comes into being
she is Eve. In like manner, when it is said, “ This is My body ; this
is My blood,” the meaning is, This is consecrated, produced, and
becomes My body and blood, so that at the close of the consecration
it is in fact My body and blood.

This form of consecration then, “ This is My body,” seems, from
what has been said, to signify properly and primarily, not the starting-
point, “ viz., the change and annihilation of the bread, but the goal,
viz., the production of the body and blood of Christ ; and this is
pointed to in the pronoun “ this.” In other words : that which under
the species of bread and wine is produced and comes into being,
and when it comes into being exists, is My body and blood. Still,
in a secondary sense, the form of words denotes the destruction of
the starting-point, the bread, and its transubstantiation. For, as
under these species the substance of bread and wine formerly existed,
and as they have to give place to the body and blood of Christ, which
are produced by virtue of the words of consecration, so the pronoun
“this” refers to nothing else but the body and blood of Christ.
Hence, since by these words it is signified that the body of Christ is
produced, it is necessarily also signified that the bread is done away
with and transubstantiated into the body.

The words of consecration are (i.) simply practical, and denote,
“This is made My body;” (2.) enuntiative, denoting, This at the
end of the consecration is My Body; (3.) conversive and trans-
substantiative, and denote that “this” substance of bread contained
under this species is changed into the body of Christ, in such a way
that, when the consecration is finished, bread no longer remains, but
has been changed into the body of Christ

Is. (1.) We must notice that Christ does not seem to have said
is, for the Hebrew and Aramaic do not use the verb substantive but
understand it, nay, they do not possess the present tense. Conse-
quently in Greek and Latin the verb is not of the essence of the form
of consecration ; still in practice it ought not to be omitted, and can-
not be omitted without grievous sin, for the form of consecration
would be ambiguous without it (2.) The verb “ is ” is better supplied

Digitized by

Google

THE WORDS OF INSTITUTION

287

than “is made,” (a) because there is no change here from not being
to being, as “ is made ” would imply, for the flesh of Christ existed
before; (b) because “is” expresses the instantaneousness of the
change, and includes what is and what was ; (c) because the pronoun
“this” properly points to what is, not to what is being made, for
what is not yet cannot, strictly speaking, be seen and pointed to,
yet it is afterwards said to be pointed to when it is shown to be coming
into existence so as to be seen ; (d) because “ is ” signifies the abiding,
unchanging truth of this sacrament; ( e ) because, lastly, it is better to
say, “Take eat: this is My body,” than, “This is being made My body.”
(3.) Notice again that Christ consecrated by the words, “This is
My body,” and not when He blessed the bread. So priests now
consecrate by them in imitation of Christ, as the Councils of Florence
and Trent and all the Fathers lay down, in opposition to the Greeks.
Hence these words are used by the priest (a) historically, as relating
what Christ did ; (b) personally, as imitating in consecrating the exact
actions of Christ. Hence in consecrating and transubstantiating
the priest puts on the person of Christ

My Body . — 1. Notice that “body” here signifies, not the whole
man, but the flesh as distinguished from the soul, which flesh is here
present by the force of the words alone. The soul and divinity are
present, however, by concomitance, both with the body and the
blood. So too by concomitance the blood is with the body under
the species of bread, and the body in turn is with the blood under
the species of wine. Cf. the Council of Trent.

2. Notice that Christ here instituted the sacrament of the
Eucharist for all to partake of, and at the same time a sacrifice for the
priests to offer to God. So the Church teaches, following Apostolical
tradition, and 90 the Council of Trent lays down (sess. xxii. c. 1).
This is the one sacrifice of the New Law, the antitype of all that were
under the Old Law. Therefore this one sacrifice is at once Eucharistic,
a sin-offering, a burnt-offering, and a peace-offering.

Which is broken for you . 1. According to Ambrose and

Theophylact, the body of Christ is now being broken under the
species, or by means of the species of bread, which are being broken

Digitized by

Google

288 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

and consumed, and so it is, as S. Luke has it, given to God, that is,
sacrificed. All this is implied in the word “ broken.” Formerly, in the
sacrifice called the “ mincha ” when the bread was offered to God, it
had to be broken, blessed, and eaten, as S. Thomas points out (iii.
qu. 85, art. 3, ad. 3). Hence the Catholic confession of Beren-
garius, in which he recanted his error about the Eucharist, runs, that
the body of Christ is in truth handled and broken by the hands of
the priests, and pressed by the teeth of the faithful, viz., through the
sacramental species of bread, which is handled, broken, and pressed.
For this species is no longer that of bread, but of Christ’s body,
which alone is the substance here under such species or accidents.
Hence it is that, when this species is seen, touched, and named, it is
the substance of the body of Christ that is seen, touched, and named,
and nothing else, just as before consecration, by the same species
was seen, touched, and named the substance of bread.

2. “ Is broken ” denotes, shall be shortly broken and immolated
on the Cross. So Anselm. This breaking and immolation were not
so much future as present, for the day of the Passover and Christ’s
suffering had begun when Christ said these words. It was therefore
a kind of prolonged present. It was, says Cajetan, to be broken
with scourgings in its skin, nails in its hands and feet, and a spear
in its side.

3. Bellarmine ( de Missa , lib. i. c. 1 2) says : “ In the Eucharist

the body of Christ is broken, *.*., is divided ^pd destroyed, viz.,
when under the distinct and different species of bread and wine. It
is offered to God, taken, and consumed, to represent the suffering
and death of Christ.” Hence S. Chrysostom says : The breaking of

the body in the sacrament is a symbol of the Passion, and of the
body broken on the Cross.” Tropologically this breaking denotes
mortification. Cf. S. Dionysius ( Eccl \ Bier . c. iii.).

Ver. 25. — After the same manner also He took the cup when He had
supped , saying , This cup is the new testament in My blood.” Notice
(1.) that Christ, after He celebrated the typical supper of the Paschal
lamb, and afterwards the common supper on other meats, instituted
the third, viz., the Eucharistic supper.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE WORDS OF INSTITUTION

289

2. Notice that the heathen offer their sacrifices after a banquet,
as giving thanks to God for their feast, and offered Him libations
and sang His praises crowned with garlands. (Cf. Athen. lib. i. c. ix.
and lib. xv. c. 20, also Virg. Ain. lib. viii., also Giraldus, de JDiis
Gentium.) The ancient ritual records of the Hebrews show that
they did the same in the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb. When the
supper was over, the head of the family took a piece of unleavened
bread and broke it into as many parts as there were guests, and
gave a piece to each, saying, “ This is the bread of affliction which
our fathers ate in the land of Egypt : whosoever hungers, let him
come nigh and complete the Passover.” Then he would take a cup
and bless it, saying, “ Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who hast created
the fruit of the vine,” &c. Then he would taste of it, and hand it
on to the next, and he to his neighbour, and so on till it had made
the round of the table.

Christ follows their customs in instituting the Eucharist, and He
left it as His last farewell and testament, and to give us and His
disciples a symbol and proof of His great love, and to replace the
typical lamb by the verity of the Eucharist And this is why Christ
supped first and instituted the Eucharist last of all Now, however,
through reverence for so great a sacrament, the Eucharist, by Apostolic
tradition, is always received fasting.

This cup is the new testament in My blood. This is the authentic in-
strument, and as it were the paper on which the new testament has
been written and sealed, i.e., the new covenant ratified, and the new
promises of God confirmed, and My last will to give you an eternal in-
heritance, sealed, if only you will believe on Me and obey Me. It
has been written, not in letters of ink, but in My blood, contained in
this cup, just as a sheet of parchment contains the writing of the will.

You will perhaps object that SS. Matthew and Mark have : “ This
is the blood of the new testament.” Why, then, does S. Paul say,
“ This cup,” /.<?., the blood contained in this cup, “ is the testament ? ”
I answer that testament has a twofold meaning — ( a ) the last will
of a testator, in which sense it is used by the two Evangelists, who

speak of the blood in which the last will of Christ was confirmed ;
vol. 1 . t

Digitized by v^,ooQle

290 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

and (b) it signifies the writing or the instrument of this last wilL So
S. Paul uses it here, and calls the blood itself the testament.

Notice (i.) that Christ is here alluding to the covenant of Moses
between God and the people, ratified by the blood of victims,
which in an allegory represented this covenant, ratified by the blood
of Christ. Cf. Exod. xxiv. Notice (2.) that the ancients were wont to
ratify their covenants with the blood of victims. Livy {lib. L), speak-
ing of the treaty drawn up between the Romans and Albans, says :
“ When the laws of the treaty had been agreed upon, the Fetial priest
said, ‘The Roman people will not be the first to break them. If it shall
at any time do so, by common consent and with hostile intent, then
do thou, O Jupiter, on the same day strike the Roman people as I
this day strike this boar. Strike them the harder as thy power is the
greater.* Then he killed the boar by a blow from a flint stone.” Cf.
too Virg. £n . lib. viii.). This same custom was common also long
before that amongst true worshippers of God. Hence (Gen. xv. 9,
10, 17) the Lord ordered a bullock, a ram, and ashe-goat to be sacri-
ficed for a sign and confirmation of the covenant that He had made
with Abraham, and He divided them in the midst. When this was
done, a lamp representing God passed through between the pieces,
typifying that so should he be divided who should break the cove-
nant Cf. Jeremiah xxxiv. 18. Hence Cyril {contra Julian , lib. x.).
shows from Sophocles that this custom was observed in later times,
when they went through the midst of a fire carrying a sword in their
hands when they took an oath. Cf. also in this connection Exod.
xxiv. The blood of the victims was here sprinkled, to signify that
he who should break the covenant would in like manner pay with
his own blood for his broken faith. But because it was between
God and the people that the covenant was made, it was necessary
for both God and the Israelites to divide the blood between them
to be sprinkled with it ; and since God is incorporeal, and so cannot
be sprinkled with blood, the altar was sprinkled with the blood of
the sacrifices in His stead.

In the same way Christ the Lord ratified the new covenant with
His own blood, being the blood of a federal victim ; especially be-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE WORDS OF INSTITUTION

29I

cause by His blood He won redemption, grace, and an inheritance
for us, and all the other good things which He promised us in His
covenant. Cf. Hebrews ix. 15 et seq . He expressed this in the
institution of the Eucharist when He said : “ This cup is the new
testament in My blood,” or as S. Matthew more clearly expresses
it, “This is My blood of the new testament” From this we may
collect a strong argument against the Sacramentaries for the verity
of the body of Christ ; for if the old covenant was ratified in blood,
as we see it was from Exod. xxiv. 8, where we read, “ This is the blood
of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you,” so too is the
new covenant ratified with actual blood, as we see from the words,
“This is My blood of the new testament.” For here the old was a
type of the new and the real covenant, and it is certain that Christ
here referred to it

It may be said, Christ speaks of the blood of the new testament,
not of the new covenant, as Moses does in Exod. xxiv., and therefore
the two sprinklings are dissimilar. I answer that testament here has
a twofold meaning : (a) specially for the last will of a testator, or his
authentic instrument ; and when his will is conditioned, his promise
takes the form of an agreement or covenant. Even if his will be
absolute, yet there is always involved a mutual obligation on the
testators side to bequeath his goods, and on the side of the bene-
ficiary to undertake the debts and burdens of the testator, and to
carry out his wishes. But since a testament contains the last wishes
of a man, and so makes, as it were, a closely binding agreement, the
word has come to mean (b) any agreement, promise, or covenant, as
S. Jerome says (in Malachi ii.), and Innocent (de Celeb . Miss \ cap . cum
Marth , .), and S. Augustine (Locut. in Genes. 94). This is proved to
be the meaning in both Latin and Greek by Budseus.

Hence it is that Christ and S. Paul, following the Septuagint,
mean by the “ blood of the testament ” the blood of the covenant,
whether in its looser or stricter meaning ; for testament here can be
understood in both ways: (1.) the Eucharist gives us the blood*
of Christ as an earnest of our promised possession in heaven, or of
the covenant entered into with us about it; (2.) this covenant was

Digitized by Google

292 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

Christ’s last will, and is therefore a testament most important and
most sure. Hence, too, the Apostle teaches us that Christ, the
testator, sealed this testament with His blood. Cf. notes to Heb.
viii. io.

Do this, that I have just done— consecrate, offer as a sacrifice,
take, distribute the Eucharist, as I have consecrated, offered, taken,
and distributed it. Hence the Apostles were here ordained priests.
So the Council of Trent says (sess. xxii. c. i), following the perpetual
belief of the Church.

It may be objected that Christ did not say, “ I have sacrificed :
do you also sacrifice.” I answer i. that neither did He say, “I
have instituted the sacrament : do you celebrate it.” Nor did He
say on the Cross, “I offer Myself as a sacrifice,” but He actually
did so. So, too, this consecration was a real offering of sacrifice,
inasmuch as by it, through a real transubstantiation, there was
offered to the glory of God a most worthy victim, viz., the body of
Christ under the species of an animal slain and dead, that is, a body
separated from the blood as far as the act of consecration goes.

2. That the Eucharist is a sacrifice is also implied by the phrase
“ when He had supped.” In other words, after the sacrifice of the
typical lamb, Christ instituted the true and blessed Eucharistic
sacrifice which the lamb had foreshadowed. Since the Paschal
lamb was a type of the Eucharist and was a sacrifice, as is agreed
by all, it follows that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.

3. The word “testament” also implies the sacrifice of the
Eucharist, for the blood by which covenants were ratified was the
blood of victims. As then, when it is said in Exod. xxiv. 8, “ This
is the blood of the covenant that the Lord hath made with you,”
we understand the blood of the victims sacrificed, by which the old
covenant was ratified;* so when Christ said, “This is My blood of
the new testament,” we must understand the blood of the sacrifice
by which the new testament was ratified, and which was prefigured
by the old covenant, and by the blood of the sacrifice. Lastly, in
the Eucharist alone Christ is properly and perfectly the Priest
after the order of Melchizedech ; for on the cross (if the victim

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE WORDS OF INSTITUTION

2§3

and its slaughter, the oblation and the effusion of the blood be con-
sidered) Christ was a Priest after the order of Aaron only, i.e., His
priesthood was like Aaron’s. So the Fathers lay down. See them
quoted in Bellarmine ( de Missd , lib. i c. 6 and 12). This too is
the voice and mind of the Church of all ages.

It may be said again that the Eucharist is a commemoration of
the sacrifice on the Cross, and therefore it is not a sacrifice. I deny
that this follows, for if so the ancient sacrifices would not be
true sacrifices, although they prefigured the sacrifice of the Cross.
Similarly, the Eucharist is a true sacrifice, though it is done in com-
memoration of the sacrifice of the Cross.

Ver. 26. — For as often as ye eat this breads &c. Ye show it forth not
only in word (as in the canon of the Mass are the words, “Wherefore
we, mindful of Thy blessed Passion,” &c.), but better still in deed, both
to yourselves and to the people. So Anselm, Theophylact, Ambrose.

Theophylact draws the moral lesson : “ When you take the Eu-
charist you should feel just as if you were with Christ on the evening
of the Paschal feast and at supper with Him, lying by His side on
the couch , and receiving from His own hands the sacred food ; for that
is the supper , and that is the death which we announce and show till
His second advent.”

Take note that it is His death rather than the mighty deeds of
His life that Christ bids us show. The reason is, that by His death
the testament of Christ was completed, together with His last will,
and our redemption, and the supreme love that He had for us, which
caused Him to die for us. Of all these the Eucharist is the memorial
S. Basil says tropologically (in Reg. Brev. 234) : “ We announce the
Lords death when we die unto sin and live unto Christy or when the
world is crucified unto us and we unto the world.”

Lastly, S. Hippolytus (de Consumm. Mundi.) says, with S. Chry-
sostom and Theophylact, that the sacrifice and sacrament of the
Eucharist will publicly last till the second coming of Christ and the
coming of Anti-Christ, who will remove it, as Daniel foretold (xii. n),
and prevent it from being publicly celebrated at all events. S. Paul
implies this when he says, “ Until He come,” that is, till the glorious

Digitized by v^,ooQle

294 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

Lord come to judgment Hence, as S. Thomas says, it appears that
the celebration of the Eucharist will last to the end of the world.

Ver. 27. — Whosoever shall eat this bread . . . unworthily shall
be guilty , &c. He will be guilty of violating, of taking and handling
the Lord’s body unworthily, as Judas and the Jews did. So Photius,
Theophylact, and Chrysostom. The two latter say that he will be as
guilty of the Lord’s death as if he had slain the Lord and had shed
His blood. We must understand this, however, with some reserve
and regard for proportion; for absolutely the homicide, or rather
deicide of Christ was a greater sin than an unworthy communion,
just as it is a greater injury to slay a king than to spit on him.
Ambrose (in Heb. x.) agrees with Chrysostom, for he says : “ By this
sin the body of the Lord is trodden under foot.” Cyprian too says
(Serm. de Lapis): “Force is applied to the Lord’s body, and by
hands and mouth we sin against Him.” Cf. also S. Basil ( de Baft.
Serm . 2). As one who lies at a king’s table with hatred in his heart
does him great injury, so does he who is partaker of the Lord’s table
when in mortal sin, nay, he does Him greater injury, for he feeds
on Christ Himself, and receives Him into a heart full of hatred.

The Latin version has or drink this cup of the Lord, whence is
inferred the sufficiency of communion in one kind.

It appears, moreover, from this verse, that in the Eucharist there
is the true body of Christ; for it is not true of the bare sign that
he who takes it unworthily is guilty of the Lord’s body. Besides
this, if you say with Calvin that the unworthy communicant is guilty
of the Lord’s body, not because he has violated it in itself, but its
image in the Eucharist, then at all events it follows that images (as
they say the Eucharist is) are to be venerated, and that the iconoclasts
who break them are guilty of the body and blood of Christ and His
saints. How then can Calvin and his supporters have the audacity
to lay violent hands on them and destroy them ?

Ver. 28 — But let a man examine himself. Calvin says that he is
to examine himself to see whether he has faith ; but it is presumed
that he has this, for the Apostle is speaking of the Corinthian faithful.
But according to Calvin each is most certain, and by divine faith

Digitized by v^,ooQle

UNWORTHY COMMUNION

295

is bound to believe that he has this faith, so that if this be so there
is no need for examination. The true meaning is that a man is to
examine himself whether he is fit and rightly disposed towards so
great mysteries, and then fittingly prepare himself, and see if he
knows of any sin, especially mortal sin, as, e,g :, drunkenness or pride
(ver. 21), and then purge himself by contrite confession. The
Council of Trent (sess. xiil c 7) lays down that this examination and
confession are of Divine law or Christ’s institution, according to
S. Paul. The same was said 1 200 years before this Council, by S.
Leo ( Ep. 91 ad Theod. Foroj .) and by Cyprian {de Lapsis), Let a
man too examine himself, with the pious intention of uprooting all
venial sins by the help of prayer. So Chrysostom and Ambrose.
Hence before the Passover supper, before their common meal, and
before the Eucharist, Christ washed the disciples’ feet, including
Judas, to signify the purity with which we should approach the
feast (S. John xiii. 5).

It will greatly stimulate this examination if the following words
of S. Gregory {Dial lib. iv. c. 58) be earnestly meditated on : “ This
victim singularly saves the soul from eternal deaths and repairs
mysteriously the death of the Only-Begotten Son , who, being risen
from the dead , dieth no more , and death hath no more dominion over
Him, yet liveth an immortal and incorruptible life , and is sacrificed
again for us in the mystery of this oblation, . . . Who is there of the
faithful that doubts that at the moment of sacrifice the heavens are
opened at the priests words , the choirs of angels are present at this
mystery of Jesus Christ, the lowest are joined to the highest, things
earthly with divine , and things visible and invisible become one f . . .
But when we join in these mysteries, we must sacrifice ourselves to God
with contrite hearts ; for we, who celebrate the mysteries of the Lords
Passion, ought to show it in our lives. Then the Victim will be of real
avail for us before God, when we have made ourselves victims to Him”

Meditate, also, on the words of Thomas Theodidactus (de Imit .
Christi, lib. iv. c. 2) : “ When you celebrate or hear Mass, it ought to
seem to you as great, as fresh , and as joyous as if at that very moment
Christ was for the first time descending into the Virgin's womb, or

Digitized by v^,ooQle

296 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XL

hanging on the Cross , and suffering and dying for us men and for
our salvation. " S. Cassius, Bishop of Narnia, thus thought and did
S. Gregory writes {Horn 37 in Evang.): “His custom was to offer
the daily sacrifice , and when he came to the hour for the sacrifice , he
was wholly overcome by tears, and offered himself with contrite heart
a willing sacrifice." Therefore he merited to hear his Lord saying :
“Do what you are doing: finish the work you have begun , let not thy
foot cease nor thy hand tarry ; on the birthday of the Apostles you shall
come to Me, and I will pay you your great reward." He died on
the feast of SS. Peter and Paul, and his soul was taken to heaven.
In the same way S. Gregory, too, daily celebrated Mass, with careful
preparation and perfect contrition. On one occasion he discovered
that a poor man had died in a remote place, and for some days he
abstained from the Mass, and gave himself up to grief, to expiate his
fault, as though it had been by his negligence that the poor man had
died of hunger. On the contrary, his charity, and the trouble he
took, were so great that he provided with the necessaries of life all
the poor, not only of Rome, but also of nearly the whole of Italy.
So S. Thomas Aquinas, when at the point of death, prepared him-
self by floods of tears for the Holy Communion.

Ver. 29 . — For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, &c. This is,
say Photius and Anselm, he that treats it as ordinary and everyday
kind of food. For, as S. Justin says (Apol. ad Ant. Fium): “ We
Christians take the Eucharist not as common food, but we believe that,
as by the Word of God the Son of God was made man 9 so by the words
of consecration are the body and blood of Christ made to be present in
the Eucharist." Therefore, too, S. Francis, writing to the priests of
his order (tom. v. Biblioth. Pat.) says: “ Listen , my brothers: if the
Blessed Virgin is rightly honoured 9 who bore Him in her holy womb ;
if S. John Baptist trembled and was afraid to touch the Lord's head;
if such honour is paid to the tomb in which He sometime lay 9 how
holy 9 just 9 and worthy ought he to be, how should he quake and fear
who handles with his hands, takes in his heart and mouth, and gives
to others Him who is to die no more, but lives for ever in glory, upon
whom the angels desire to gaze. . . . A great and pitiable weakness is
it, that when you have Him present in this way you should care for

Digitized by v^,ooQle

UNWORTHY COMMUNION

297

anything else in the world . Let the whole man tremble , all the world
quake , and the heavens rejoice , when Christy the Son of the living God ,
is upon the altar in the priests hands?

Ver. 30. — For this cause many are weak . So at the present day,
says S. Anselm, are many taken with various diseases after the
Eucharist, because they have received unworthily the Lord’s body.

And many sleep . Die prematurely, and sleep in death, be-

cause they have communicated unworthily and without prepara-
tion. So S. Anselm and Chrysostom. They were even vexed by
the devil because of this sin. Cf S. Chrysostom (Horn. 5 in 1
Tim.). S. Cyprian (de Lapsis) gives examples. He says that some
who had eaten things offered to idols, and then received the
Eucharist, were struck dumb ; another pulled out her tongue ; a girl,
after eating of idol-meats, vomited the elements. Francis Suarez
piously warns us from this how careful a watch should be kept by
every communicant over his tongue, because the tongue is the first
member to receive Christ, and is the instrument by which He begins
to be assimilated.

Ver. 31. — But if we judge ourselves. That is, according to the Latin
Fathers, punish ourselves; according to the Greek, condemn our-
selves ; or thirdly, prove and examine ourselves to see if there be
any sin in us, and then expiate it by contrite confession, as was
ordered in ver. 28. So Cajetan and Gagneius. This third meaning
is the best and most literal.

We should not be judged. Not be punished by the judgment of
God with diseases and death, as in ver. 30. So Erasmus and
Vatablus. S. Augustine ( Senten . 210) well says: “Sins, whether
small or great, cannot go unpunished. They are smitten, either by the
repentance of the penitent or by the judgment of the Great Judge. But
Divine vengeance gives way if man's conversion forestall it. For God
loves to spare them that confess their sins, and to refrain from judging
them that judge themselves."

Ver. 32. — But when we are judged we are chastened of the Lord,
&c. When we are punished in this present life with diseases and
death, it is to prevent us from being condemned with unbelievers
and sinners. We are warned by God’s chastening to expiate the

Digitized by v^,ooQle

298 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XI.

sin of unworthy communion by repentance, and so be saved. So
S. Augustine {Sent. 274) says : u When God corrects the human race ,
and troubles it with the scourges of holy chastening , He is exercising
discipline before judgment , and for the most part He loves whom He
chastens , being unwilling to find one to condemn .”

Vers. 33, 34. — Wherefore , my brethren ... if any man hunger ,
let him eat at home . The Apostle here gives orders that after the
Eucharist they all wait for each other before beginning the agape ;
or rather, as was said at ver. 21, that they wait for each other at the
supper which preceded Communion, so that they all might come
together at the same time for this feast with common charity and
concord, and recruit themselves in it moderately and soberly, and so
not approach afterwards to take the Lord’s body unworthily, viz., in
drunkenness and discord. If there is any one who cannot wait for
this meal, the Apostle bids him go home and eat it there. He says
this to shame them. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, CEcumenius.

It is deduced from this passage that it was then the custom for
those who were going to communicate to fast for the whole day until
the common meal ; this is why the Apostle says that they came to
it hungry. Anselm says somewhat differently, that if any one can-
not fast till the time for Communion, let him eat at home, but not
communicate afterwards. But the first meaning is the better.

That ye come not together unto condemnation . Because of your pride,
gluttony, drunkenness and disobedience.

The rest will I set in order when I come . The other things, that
is, which make for the worthy and decent celebration of the Eucharist.
This is a well-known passage in support of the traditions of the
Church. S. Augustine (Ep. 118) says: “ The Church's tradition is
for the Eucharist to be taken fasting, although Christ instituted it
after supper." Another tradition is for water to be mingled with
the wine. Cf. S. Cyprian {Ep. 63 ad Ccecil.). Another is for the
Mass to be offered for the living and the dead, and with a well-defined
form of words, and ornaments of the priest and altar, &c.

Christians formerly communicated in this way: (1.) They fasted

till the Lord’s Supper, as was seen at ver. 34 : “ If any man hunger,
let him eat at home.” (2.) The people offered in the Church bread

Digitized by v^,ooQle

ECCLESIASTICAL TRADITIONS

299

and wine to the deacons at a certain place. By them their offerings
were taken to the altar. Little tables were set up for those who were
going to communicate, just as now-a-days the people communicate
at a table covered with a cloth. Before communion a deacon cried
out, “ Holy things for the holy.” The priest in communicating any
one said, “The body of Christ.” The answer was given, “Amen.”
They received not with the mouth, but in the hand, the man with
his right hand ungloved, placed over his left in the form of a cross,
whence the hands were washed beforehand ; the woman with her
hand covered with a clean white piece of linen called the “ dominical.”
The Council of Auxerre (can. 36) enacted that no woman should
take the Eucharist with bare hands, and also that each woman should
have her “ dominical ” when she communicated. If she had not got
it, she was not to communicate till the next Sunday (can. 39). Cyril
of Jerusalem ( Catach . 5) says : “ When you approach for communion,
do not come with outspread hands, or fingers disjoined, but make the
left hand a throne for the right, which is to receive so great a king,
and with hollowed palm receive the body of Christ with the reply,
‘Amen. 1 Moreover the Eighth Council of Constantinople (can. 101)
enacted the same thing in the words : “ Jf any one of unstained body
wish to communicate , , before he do so let him put his hands into the shape
of a cross to receive the sacrament of love . Those who make receptacles
of gold or other material to do the duty of their hands in receiving the
Holy Communion are not to be admitted \ inasmuch as they prefer some
inanimate form of matter to the image of their God P Again, each one
put into his mouth the Eucharist he had received in his hand, that
is the species of bread, and it was taken daily, fasting. In S. Cyprian's
time they received the Eucharist also under the species of wine, in
order that in times of persecution they might be strengthened to shed
a martyr's blood by receiving the blood of Christ. Hence S. Cyprian
(Ep. 5 6 ad Thibarit.) says : “ A more severe and more bloody fight is at
handy for which the soldiers of Christ ought to prepare themselves with
uncorrupted virtue and robust faith , recollecting that they daily receive
the chalice of the blood of Christ for the very object of enabling them to
shed their blood for Christ ” As S. Chrysostom says, “ We leave that
table like lions breathing out fire, and made terrible to the devils.”

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CHAPTER XII

I Spiritual gifts 4 are divers, 7 yet all to profit withal. % And to that end are
diversely bestowed : 12 that by the like proportion , as the numbers of a natural
body tend all to the 16 mutual decency , 22 service , and 26 succour of the same
body ; 27 so we should do one for another, to make up the mystical body of
Christ.

*V[ OW concerning spiritual gifts , brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

***^ 2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols,

even as ye were led.

3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of
God caileth Jesus accursed : and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but
by the Holy Ghost.

4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit

5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.

6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which
worketh all in all

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom ; to another the word
of knowledge by the same Spirit ;

9 To another faith by the same Spirit ; to another the gifts of healing by the
same Spirit ;

10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another
discerning of spirits ; to another divers kinds of tongues ; to another the
interpretation of tongues :

1 1 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every
man severally as he will.

12 For as the body in one, and hath many members, and all the members of
that one body, being many, are one body : so also is Christ.

13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or
Gentiles, whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into
one Spirit

14 For the body is not one member, but many.

1 5 If the foot shall say, Because 1 am not the hand, I am not of the body ; is
it therefore not of the body ?

16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body ;
is it therefore not of the body ?

17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were
hearing, where were the smelling ?

18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it
hath pleased him.

300

Digitized by v^,ooQle

SYNOPSIS

301

19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee : nor again
the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble,
are necessary :

23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable,
upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have
more abundant comeliness.

24 For our comely parts have no need : but God hath tempered the body
together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked :

25 That there should be no schism in the body ; but that the members should
have the same care one for another.

26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one
member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets,
thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments,
diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of
miracles ?

30 Have all the gifts of healing ? do all speak with tongues ? do all interpret ?

31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet show I unto you a more
excellent way.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

In this and the two following chapters S. Paul discusses Christian gifts and
graces. In this chapter he points out—

i. That gifts are variously distributed by the Holy Spirit.

ii. To show this he draws an illustration from the human body, which,

though it is one, yet has many different members, and he concludes that
each one in the Church should be content with the grace given him, and
the position in which he is placed, and use his gifts for the common
good, so that all, as members of the same body, may help and care for
each other (ver. 12).

iii. Next he declares that God has provided His Church with different

classes of men, so that some are apostles, some prophets, some
teachers, &c. (ver. 28).

In this chapter S. Paul deals with such gifts as prophecy, tongues,
and powers of healing, &c. In the beginning of the Church these
gifts were abundantly bestowed upon the faithful by the Holy Spirit,
even as they were upon the Apostles on the day of Pentecost The
occasion for his dealing with these was the way in which the Corin-

Digitized by v^,ooQle

302 FIRST EPISTLE TO TIIE CORINTHIANS, C. XIL

thians prided themselves upon these gifts : one put an extravagant
value on one gift, another on another, and some were mortified at
not receiving some gifts which they saw others have. The Apostle,
therefore, lays down what these gifts are — their nature and import,
and the manner of their use.

Ver. i. — I would not have you ignorant. And therefore he pro-
ceeds to give them teaching about them.

Ver. 2. — Ye know that ye were Gentiles , &c. You were led like
slaves, by custom, by the institutions of your ancestors, by religious
tradition, and by diabolic agency to these dumb idols. For the
Hebraism in the employment of the participle instead of the finite
verb, c£ Rom. xil n. Remember, he says, O Corinthians, that
when you were Gentiles you used to worship idols, as stocks and
stones which have neither breath, feeling, power of speech, nor
strength of any kind, and much less can give such things to their
worshippers. But now that you have become Christians you can
worship God, who is pure spirit, full of all grace and wisdom, and
sheds these same spiritual gifts abundantly upon you, as you daily
experience. Recognise, therefore, the grace bestowed upon you by
Christ, the change wrought in you, and worship Christ, the author of
all this, together with the Holy Spirit.

Ver. 3. — Wherefore . . . no man . . . calleth Jesus accursed. The
“ wherefore ” shows this verse to be a conclusion from the preceding,
and explains it I have reminded you, he says, of your previous con-
dition as Gentiles, and of your dumb idols, in order that you may
appreciate duly the greatness of your calling, and the grace of the
Holy Spirit given you in your baptism, by which you no longer call
on dumb idols but on Christ and the Holy Spirit, and receive from
them gifts of tongues, &c., that you may know how full of eloquence
and energy compared with your dumb idols is the Holy Spirit who
makes you eloquent in divine wisdom. Acknowledge, then, the
Holy Spirit’s power, and contend no more about His gifts, since you
have them from the Holy Spirit, who distributes His gifts as He
wills. Let not him who has received less grieve thereat, nor him
who has received more be high-minded. So Chrysostom.

Digitized by v^,ooQle

CURSING CHRIST

303

No man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed. No
one execrates or blasphemes Jesus if he has the Spirit of God. He
rather acknowledges Him and calls upon Him, as the author of the
grace he has received, of his salvation, and of all spiritual gifts. S.
Paul uses the figure meiosis, and leaves the rest to be understood.

Observe that S. Paul says this to the Corinthians, partly because
of the Jews, who to this day are declared to say in their synagogues,
Cajetan says, “May Jesus and the Christians be accursed;” partly,
also, and even more, because of the Gentiles, among whom the
Corinthians were living. They and their poets, and their priests
especially, were in the habit of execrating Jesus. Moreover, by this
Gentile rulers tested whether any one were a Christian or not.
They would order them to curse Christ, as Pliny says, that he had
ordered (Ep. ad Traj .) : “ There was brought before me a schedule
containing the names of many who were accused of being Christians.
They deny that they are or ever were Christians. In my presence they
called upon the gods, and burnt incense , and poured a libation of wine
to your image, which I had ordered to be brought in amongst the statues
of the gods. Moreover , they cursed Christ ; and it is said that those
who are true Christians cannot be in any way forced to do any of these
things. I thought , therefore, that they ought to be dismissed. Others
said that they had been Christians, but had now ceased to be; they
all paid honour to your image and the images of the gods, and cursed
Christ . ”

No man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost.
The Apostle draws a contrast between calling Jesus accursed and
calling Him Lord. No one can recognise, believe, invoke, and preach
Jesus as Lord, and profess faith in Him as he ought, and as is
necessary to salvation, except in the Holy Spirit, i.e., through the
Holy Spirit. For faith, hope, and prayer are His gifts.

S. Paul does not by this deny that unbelievers, under the ordinary
influence only of God, can profess the name of Jesus, or have good
thoughts about Him, but only that no one without the grace of
Christ and the Holy Spirit can with true faith and pious affection
invoke Jesus as Lord earnestly and heartily, and confess Him to be

Digitized by v^,ooQle

304 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

our Redeemer ; or even say in his heart, or think of Him anything
which in its rank and order confers and disposes to forgiveness of sins,
grace, and eternal bliss. So say Ambrose and Anselm. This appears
from the fact that he is addressing the Corinthian faithful, and re-
buking the pride which they took in their gifts and graces, on the
ground that they have their faith and all their gifts, not from them-
selves but from the Holy Spirit. These gifts, then, he means to say,
are not your own, nor can you even call upon Jesus of yourselves ;
but to know Him and call upon Him are the gift of the Holy Spirit

Ver. 4. — Now there are diversities of gifts. One grace is given to
one, another to another, but they all proceed from the same Spirit

Ver. 5. — And there are differences of administrations.. There are
different kinds of sacred ministries distributed by the same Lord, from
whom as God and through whom as man we receive them, so that He
is ministered to in different ways by different people. So Anselm.

Ver. 6. — And there are diversities of operations , &c. Observe 1.
that the Apostle assigns gifts to the Holy Spirit, the fount of goodness;
ministries to the Son, as Lord ; operations to the Father, as the first
beginning of all things. So Theophylact and Anselm.

2. The gifts here spoken of are what are sometimes called “ graces
gratuitously given the ministries are the various offices in the Church,
such as the diaconate, the Episcopate, and the care of the poor ; the
operations are miraculous powers, such as the exorcism of demons,
the healing the sick, the raising the dead. The word operations is
explained in ver. 10 by being expanded into “working of miracles,”
which is translated by Erasmus the “ working of powers.” The Greek
Svvafus is strictly power, might, ability, and cvcpyeia, working, Ivep-
yrjua, work.

But it will be more satisfactory to say that the Apostle calls all
graces gratuitously given (1.) graces, because they are given gratui-
tously ; (2.) ministries, because by them each one ministered to the
Church ; (3.) workings, because by them the faithful received from
the Holy Spirit a marvellous power to say and do things surpass-
ing the power of nature. These graces are the work of the Holy
Spirit equally with the Father and the Son ; for all external works, as

Digitized by v^,ooQle

GIFTS OF THE SPIRIT

305

theologians say, viz., all that go forth to created things, are common
to the Three Persons ; yet, as they are workings they are fitly assigned
to the Father, as ministries to the Son, as graces to the Holy Spirit

Which worketh all in all 1. God works everything in nature
by working effectively with second causes, as theologians teach in
opposition to Gabriel Biel Thus God brings about all the blessings
of nature and of good-fortune. That one is poor, another rich is to
be attributed to the counsel and will of God. Cf. S. Chrysostom
( Horn . 29 Moral),

2. God works all supernatural things, both the graces that make
a man pleasing to God and the graces that the Apostle means here,
viz., those gratuitously given, such as the working of miracles* What-
ever the saints ask of God in prayer, or order to be done in His
name, is done by God’s direct action, even in the realm of nature.

It does not follow from this that the co-operation of God goes
before and determines beforehand the working of secondary causes,
and of free-will in good works, and of grace that makes a man
pleasing; for in all these God works all things through His pre-
venient grace, by which He stirs up the will, and through grace
co-operating, which, together with free-will freely working, works
simultaneously everything that is good. But the Apostle is not
dealing primarily with the works of grace that make a man pleasing
to God, but with the workings of graces gratuitously given, as will
appear from what follows.

S. Hilarius (do Trin, lib. viii.) renders “ works ” “ inworks, ” and
so follows the Greek more closely, which signifies the inward
presence and effectual power with which God works all things
inwardly, especially miracles and all the other gifts. The whole
chapter deals with these.

Ver. 7. — But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to
profit withal The gift given by the Holy Spirit, and by which He is
manifested, is given for the benefit of the Church, not of the individual

Ver. 8 . — To one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom. The
power of explaining wisdom, viz., the deepest mysteries of the Tri-
nity, of the Incarnation, of predestination, &c. Cf. chap. xiii.

vol. 1 . u

Digitized by Google

30 6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

To another the word of knowledge. The power of explaining the
things pertaining to life and morals. S. Augustine distinguishes
thus between wisdom and knowledge (de Trin. lib. xil c. 14 and
15), and the Apostle so takes knowledge in chap, viil Others under-
stand by knowledge the power of explaining the things of faith by
examples, comparisons, and human and philosophical reasonings.

Ver. 9. — To another faith by the same Spirit 1. S. Paul does
not mean here the theological faith which all Christians have, but
that transcendent faith, including the theological, which is the
mother of miracles. It consists above all things in a constant con-
fidence in God for obtaining anything and for working miracles,
e.g.j as Christ says, for removing mountains. This appears from
chap, xiil 2. Cf. S. Chrysostom.

2. Ambrose understands faith here to be the gift of an intrepid
confession and preaching of the faith.

3. But best of all faith here is a clear perception of the mysteries
of the faith for the purposes of contemplation and explanation ; for
in Rom. xii. 6, S. Paul says in the same way that prophets have the
gift of prophecy, and ought to prophesy “ according to the proportion
of faith, 1 ” i.e.y according to the measure of the understanding of the
things of faith given them by God. Maldonatus (in Notis Manusc.)
says that the Apostle here means that transcendent faith possessed
by but few, and which enables its possessors to give a ready assent
to Divine things ; for the faith which works miracles seems to be
included in the “ working of powers” mentioned in the next verse,
as Toletus, amongst others, rightly points out at Rom. xii. 6.

Ver. 10. — To another the working of miracles . Literally, the
“working of powers,” viz., those greater miracles which concern the
soul, not those which belong to the body or its diseases. Of this
kind are the raising the dead, casting out devils, punishing the un-
believers and impious by a miracle, as S. Peter did Ananias and
Sapphira. So say Chrysostom and Anselm. Thus the “working
of powers” is distinguished from the “gift of healing.”

To another discerning of spirits. That is of the thoughts and
intents of the heart, and consequently of words and actions, whether

Digitized by v^,ooQle

GIFTS OF THE SPIRIT

307

they proceed from nature, or from the inspiration of God, or an
angel or the devil. So Chrysostom, Ambrose, Anselm. S. Jerome,
in his life of S. Hilarion, says that he had this gift, and S. Augus-
tine says (conf. lib. iii. c. 2) that his mother Monica had ; so too
had S. Vincent of Ferrara, and so have some now-a-days, especially
those who have the direction of souls. It is a gift most useful to
confessors, one to be sought for from God, in so far as a perfect
knowledge and care of consciences require it

To another the interpretation of tongues. Of obscure passages,
especially of Holy Scripture. Hence there were formerly in the
Church interpreters, whose duty was fourfold: (1.) there were
those who, by the gift of tongues, prophesied or sung hymns in a
foreign language ; (2.) those who, inspired by the Holy Spirit, spoke
of obscure and deep mysteries ; (3.) those who publicly expounded
the letters of S. Paul and of others sent to their people ; (4.) those
who turned them into another language. In this way many think
that S. Clement turned the letter to the Hebrews from Hebrew into
Greek. It appears from this that Holy Scripture is not plain to
every one; nor is it, as the heretics think, to be interpreted by the
private ideas of any one, seeing that God has placed interpreters
in His Church. But it should be noted that these interpreters have
now been succeeded by professors of Hebrew, Greek, and Divinity.

1. From this chapter and the following, theologians have drawn
the distinction between grace which perfects its subject and makes
him pleasing to God, such as charity, chastity, piety, and other
virtues, and grace gratuitously given, which is ordained for the
perfecting of others. Although the Apostle names here nine only
of the “graces gratuitously given,” yet there may be more.

2. It is very likely that of these nine five are permanent habits,
viz., wisdom, knowledge, faith, different kinds of tongues and their
interpretation, to which must sometimes be added the discerning
of spirits. The remaining four are not habits but transient actions,
viz., the gift of healing, the working of miracles, prophecy, and the
discerning of spirits. Cf. Bellarmine ( de Gratih, lib. i. c. 10).

Ver. 11. — Dividing to every man seierally as He will. Dividing

Digitized by Google

308 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

to each one individually his own gifts and graces. C£ S. Jerome
( contra Pelag. dial. i). Origen understood “as He will” to refer
to each several man. It refers, of course, to the Holy Spirit i.
Hence, as Theophylact says, the Holy Spirit is Lord and God. He
is not produced as an effect, but He effects all things equally with
the Father, who worketh all in all (ver. 6). The working all in all
assigned to the Father in ver. 6 is here assigned to the Spirit

2. It follows that the Holy Spirit, being God, has free-will and
works freely.

3. Abelard, Wyclif, and Calvin may be refuted by this verse, in
their teaching that God cannot do anything but what He actually
does do. This is to rob God of His omnipotence, and to subject
Him, like man, to fate, and therefore to transfer His Divinity to fate.
For, if this were so, God would not work as He chose, but as fate
willed, under whom He and all things would be placed.

Ver. 12 . — For as the body is one ... so also is Christ As an
animal body is one, as a man has but one body, so also has Christ
one body, the Church, the members of which are many, whose
head He is.

1. But S. Augustine objects (de Peecat. Mentis , lib. L c. 31) that if
the Apostle had meant this he would have said, “ So also is [the body]
of Christ,” rather than, “ So also is Christ” In other words, he would
have said that the body of Christ, the Church, has many members.

2. James Faber gathers from this that the body of Christ, being
indivisibly united to the whole Godhead, locally fills heaven and
earth, which are, as it were, its place and His body. As Plato said
that God was the soul of the world, and consequently was in a sense
the whole world, so the body of Christ, from its intimate conjunction
with Deity, is, like the Divine Spirit, diffused through the whole
world, its parts and members are the several divisions of space
and the bodies contained in it But still in respect of the unity
of the Deity, and of the body of Christ as its soul, they make up
one body, viz., the universe. And hence it is that the Ubiquitarians
are supposed to have obtained their false opinion that the body of
Christ is everywhere. This absurd doctrine has been confuted by

Digitized by v^,ooQle

THE BODY OF CHRIST 300

many, but most clearly of all by Gregory of Valentia, in five books
written against the heresy of the Ubiquitarians.

3. I say, then, with S. Augustine that the meaning of this passage
is simply this : So also is Christ one body, i.e., the Church. For
Christ is both head and body to the Church, inasmuch as He sus-
tains all her members and works in them all, teaches by the doctor,
baptizes by the minister, believes through faith, and repents in the
penitent. For in this sense Christ is not locally but mystically,
and by way of operation and effectually, the body, hypostasis, soul,
and spirit of the whole Church. As the Church is the body of
Christ, its head, so in turn is Christ the body of the Church, because,
through the operation of His grace, He transfers Himself into all
the members of the Church. So the Apostle often says that we
are one in Christ, that through baptism we are incorporated into
Christ and made one plant with Him. And Christ said to Paul,
“Why persecutest thou Me?” that is, the Christians, My members
(Acts ix. 4). So Paul says again: “To me to live is Christ, to
die is gain.” Therefore S. Francis in his words, “ My God, my Love,
my All,” was but echoing S. Paul.

Ver. 13. — For by one Spirit are we all baptized \ He proves that
Christ is one body with many members from baptism, for by bap-
tism we were regenerate, and incorporated into the one body of the
Church, and therefore into Christ. In that body we live by the
same Spirit, the Spirit of Christ ; and on the same food, the Eucharist,
we are fed, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, bond or free. Notice
the phrase “ into one body : ” this body is the Church, and conse-
quently we are baptized into Christ, who, as I have said, is in a
sense the body of the Church.

And have been all made to drink into one Spirit In the Eucharistic
chalice we have quaffed, together with Christ's blood, His Spirit.
Hence some Greek copies read, “ We have all drunk of one draught”
Cf. Clemens Alex. Pcedag. lib. i. c. 6. The meaning is that from
it we all partake of one and the same Spirit of Christ, who, by
abiding in all, quickens every member, and makes it perform duly
its function. In other words, not only were we born and incorpo-

Digitized by Google

310 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

rated into the said body, but we all partake of the same food, viz.,
Christ’s body and blood, in the Eucharist. For one species of the
Eucharist leads easily to the other, and by “ the drink ” we may well
understand “ the food ; ” just as on the other hand from the species
of bread we understand that of wine in chap. x. 17. Cf. Chrysostom
and Cajetan, whose comments here are noteworthy.

It appears from this that all the baptized, whether good or bad,
are the body of Christ, that is, are of the Church, and that they have
been grafted into Him as members by baptism ; for the soul of this
body, the Church, is the faith which all the faithful have, even though
their life be evil. Cf. notes to Eph. v. 27.

Ver. 22. — Nay, much more those members of the body , which seem to
be more feeble , are necessary . S. Chrysostom and Theophylact think
that this refers to the eyes, which are small and delicafe but yet
most necessary. But as the eyes have been included in the preced-
ihg verse amongst the nobler members which govern the body, it is
better to refer it, as others do, to the internal parts of the body. For
the belly is as the kitchen or the caterer for the whole of the body,
and cooks and distributes the food for every part, and therefore is
essential to the life of the body.

Ver. 23. — And those members of the body . . . upon these we bestow
more abundant honour . The “ less honourable ” members are the
feet, say Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Ambrose. We are more
careful to cover them with shoes, or to bestow ornament upon them,
lest they be hurt in walking, or catch cold, or in some way convey
illness to the stomach and head.

" Honour ” here means either covering or the attention bestowed
upon the feet in the way of decorated boots or leggings, such as
many rich young men, and especially soldiers, wear. Homer, e.g.,
frequently speaks of the “ well-greaved Achaeans.”

And our uncomely parts have more abundant honour . Chrysostom,
Ambrose, and Theopylact refer these to the pudenda. These, says
S. Augustine ( Retract . lib. ii. c. 7), are called uncomely, not because
nature so made them, but because, since the Fall, lust reigns in them
more than elsewhere, because lust is contrary to the law of reason,

Digitized by v^,ooQle

MANY MEMBERS

311

and therefore ought to be a cause of shame to man. For it puts
man to shame when his member so casts off his authority. The
more abundant honour that they receive is a more careful and comely
covering, so that even if men anywhere discard clothing, they yet
cover these parts, as Theophylact says. Moreover, these members
are honoured in wedlock, as being necessary to the procreation of
children and the perpetuation of the species, as Chrysostom says.
Hence, under the Romans, any one who emasculated himself was
severely punished, as an offender against the common good and a
violent assailant of nature.

Others think that the “ more feeble ” and “ less honourable ”
members are identical, and are the belly and its subsidiary' organs.
But the Apostle makes a distinction between them, and connects
them as distinct entities by the conjunction “and.” His meaning
then is, that as we care for those members of the body which are
more feeble and ignoble when compared to the rest, and treat them
as if they were more useful, so, too, in the Church those who seem
to be of less account, such as the infirm, the unknown, and the
despised, are for that very reason of more use and should be the
more carefully helped. So say Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm.
For the use of beggars in the Church, see S. Chrysostom ( Horn . 20
Moral \ and also contra Jnvid . Horn . 31).

We have an illustration of this verse in the allegory of the belly
deserted by the other members, by which Menenius Agrippa brought
back the lower orders who had seceded from the senate of the
Roman people, and settled on Mons Sacer (Livy, lib. ii. dec 1).
Menenius said : “At that time when men's members were not so agreed
as they are noiv , but each sought its own private ends , they say that
the other parts of the body were indignant that the belly should get its
wants supplied by their care , their toil ', and their ministry , and itself
rest quietly in the midst \ and enjoy the pleasures they gave ; so they
agreed that the hand would lift no food to the mouth, that the mouth
would not admit it if it were offered, nor the teeth chew it Then while,
as they thought, that they were reducing the belly by hunger, they found
that each member and the whole body also were brought down to the

Digitized by

Google

312 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

last extremities . They saw then that the belly had \ too , its active

service , and was not more nourished by them than they gained from it.
They saw that the blood , re-invigorated by the food that had been eaten ,
was impartially distributed through the veins into every part of the
body , giving each its life and energy . Then , by drawing a comparison
between the civil war in the body and the angry action of the lower
orders against the Fathers , Menenius induced them to return .”

Ver. 24. — For our comely parts have no need. The eyes, the face,
and the hands, which are the more comely parts of the body, lack
no ornament, but are comely enough in themselves.

Having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked. That
is more careful guard, more clothing and ornament Cf. ver. 22.

Ver. 25. — That there should be no schism in the body ; but that the
members should have the same care one for another. No schism, such
as that related by Menenius, but that all should have the same care
for the others as for themselves, or else it may mean that each mem-
ber should be solicitous for the common good of the whole body.

Ver. 26. — Whether one member suffer all the members suffer with
it. “ They suffer together ” in such a way that the suffering member’s
grief is lightened, “ not by communion in disaster, but by the solace
afforded by charity,” says S. Augustine ( Ep . 133). Hence S. Basil
(Reg. Brevior. 175) says that the outward proof of love is twofold:
(1.) rejoicing in the good of one’s neighbour and labouring for it;
(2.) in grief and sorrow for his misfortune or his sin. He who has
not this loves not

Doctors infer from this verse that souls in bliss, burning with love
for us, help us by their prayers in our troubles and dangers ; and
that we in our turn ought to help souls kept in purgatory, for they
suffer the devouring flame, and therefore he must be cruel indeed
who does not suffer with them, and do what he can to set them free.

Or one member be honoured. Or, as Ambrose takes it, “be glorified,”
or, according to Ephrem, “ whether one member rejoice.” Salmeron,
after St Chrysostom, beautifully says : “ He who loves possesses what-
ever is in the body , the Church : take away envy and what I have is
thine . 19 S. Chrysostom says again : " Jf the eye suffer , all the member

Digitized by Google

UNITY OF THE BODY

313

will grieve , all will cease to act : the feet will not go , the hands will
not work) the belly will take no pleasure in its wonted food, although
it is the eye only that is suffering . Why, O eye , do you trouble the
belly t why chain the feet ? why bind the hands t Because all are knit
together by nature , and suffer together in a mysterious manner”

Ver. 2 7. — Now ye are the body of Christy and members in particular.
The Latin version gives 44 members of the member.” This is explained
(1.) by S. Thomas: “You are members of the principal member,
viz., Christ, for Christ is the head of the Church; (2.) by S. Anselm,
44 You are members of Christ through the agency of another member,
viz., Paul, by whom you were united to Christ, the head, and to the
Church, the body.” But (3.) the Greek gives 44 members in part,” and
this is the rendering of some Latin Fathers, or 44 members of each
other.” S. Ambrose seems to understand it so. The Latin version
also means 44 fellow-members,” brethren in the same society, of the
same mystical body, the Church. So too S. Chrysostom and Ephrem,
whose meaning may be paraphrased : 44 Each one, in his part and
place, is a member of the Church.”

Notice here that, as in the body there is (1.) a unity and a union
of soul and body ; (2.) diversity of members ; (3.) differences of func-
tion between the several members ; (4.) an aptitude for its function
given to each member ; (5.) a community of interests in the members,
so that each is bound to work, not for itself only but for the others
also, just because they are members of the one body; (6.) harmony,
inasmuch as each member is content with its rank and duty, does not
seek another post or envy a more honoured member, so that there
is the most perfect union and concord, the same share in sorrow and
joy : so is it in the Church. There each one has from Christ, as if
He were his soul, his proper gift, his proper talent, his office and rank,
his functions to be discharged for others’ good, not his own, his limits
fixed by God. If any one disturbs this order and seeks after another
post, he resists the ordinance and providence of God, and forgets that
all his gifts have come from God S. Paul therefore says : 44 You, O
Corinthians are members of the same body of Christ, the Church :
let there not be then any divisions among you, let no one despise, envy,

Digitized by Google

314 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

or grieve at another, but let him love him, help him, and rejoice with
him. Let each be content with his place, his rank, and his duty, for
so he will be a partaker, not only of his own good, but also of the good
of others. Just as the foot walks for the benefit of the eye, the ear,
the belly, so in their turn the eye sees, the ear hears, and the belly
digests for the benefit of the foot. But if there is envy and unwilling-
ness shown by the eye to see, by the ear to hear, and the belly to
digest, then those members hurt themselves as much as any other ;
and, as Chrysostom says, it is just as if one hand were to cut off the
other, for that hand would be dishonoured and weakened through
receiving no help from the other hand. Moreover, if nature is at such
pains to preserve such perfect concord between the different members
of the body, and so sternly forbids any seditious discord, how much
greater concord between men’s minds will the grace of God through
its greater power effect, how little will it endure that any member
should stand aloof from and be at variance with another in the same
body ! If the magistrate or the king severely punishes sedition in
the state, what, think you, will Christ do to the schismatics who rend
His Church?

Ver. 28 , — And God hath set some in the churchy &c. Apostles as
the rulers, prophets as the eyes, teachers as the tongue. From this
it follows that the princes of this world are not, as Brentius thinks,
the rulers and the head of the Church, but the Apostles and their suc-
cessors, the Pope and the bishops ; “ for God,” says S. Paul, “ set the
Apostles first.” After that come “powers,” /.<?., workers of miracles,
who are as the hands of the Church ; then healers of diseases ; then
helps, or those who help others and perform works of mercy towards
the sick, the poor, the unhappy, guests, and foreigners ; then gover-
nments, or men who rule and correct others, as parish priests, as S.
Thomas says, or better still, with Theophylact and Cajetan, men who
have the care of the temporal wealth which the faithful offer to the
Church. These last are as the feet in the body of Christ, and of
such were the deacons ordained by the Apostles to look after tables
and the widows (Acts vi. 1-6).

Notice the abstract here put for the concrete : “ powers ” for workers

Digitized by Google

DIFFERENCE OF FUNCTION

315

of powers, “gifts of healing” for healers, “helps” for helpers,
“governments” for governors, “diversities of tongues” for men
skilled in different languages. S. Paul knits all these, as other
members of the Church, to Apostles, prophets, and teachers.

Ver. 29. — Are all apostles l Certainly not Let each, therefore,
be content with the position in which God has placed him in the
Church, and with the grace that he has freely received from God,
and thank God for all, and use the grace given him to God’s glory
and the good of the Church.

Ver. 30. — Have all the gifts of healing f S. Augustine says (Ep. 137)
that “ God, who divides to every man severally as He will, has not
willed that miracles should be wrought in honour of every saint” It is
not wonderful then that God should work miracles in this place, in
this temple, at this or that image of the Holy Mother, or again that
He should give one grace to one saint, another to another. Those,
eg., who invoke S. Antony He sets free from the plague, those
S. Apollonia from toothache, those S. Barbara from sudden death,
and from dying without confession ; for, as the Apostle says, “ God
divides to every man severally as He will.” So at the pool of •
Bethesda, and not elsewhere, God miraculously healed the impo-
tent folk (S. John v. 2-4). So by the rod of Aaron, and of no one
else, He worked miracles (Num. xvii. 8). So by the image of the
brazen serpent, and of nothing else, He set free the Jews from the
plague of fiery serpents (Num. xxi. 9).

Ver. 31. — But covet earnestly the best gifts. Seek from God, and
exercise, if you have received them (cf. notes to ver. 8), the more use-
ful gifts, such as apostleship, prophecy, wisdom, but not such as
the gift of tongues, which you are in the habit of seeking after and
of priding yourselves in. So Anselm. Others take the clause in-
terrogatively, “Do you covet the best gifts? then I will show you a
more excellent way still.” So Chrysostom, Theophylact, GEcumenius.

And yet show I unto you a more excellent way, viz., the way of
charity, which is the way to God, to life, and everlasting glory.

The commentary ascribed to S. Jerome says here that the Apostle
divides off charity from the gifts of the Spirit, because these latter are

Digitized by Google

31 6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XII.

gratuitously given by God, but charity is acquired by our own efforts
and natural powers. This shows this commentary not to be S.
Jerome’s, but the work of Pelagius or some Pelagian, as was said
before. Primasius, who transcribed a good deal of this commentary,
has shown the falsity of this remark. It appears too that charity is
the gift of God from Rom. v. 5 : “The love of God is shed abroad
in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” Hence
S. Paul says here that he shows a more excellent way, meaning one
that excels all others. If, then, the graces gratuitously given are of
lower rank and are given by God, much more ought charity, which
is exceedingly better and more excellent than them all, to be sought
for and to be given from God The Apostle then fixes the destinc-
tion between charity and the gifts of the Spirit in the fact that these
latter are given for the good of the Church, not for the sanctification
of him to whom they are given, while charity is given to make him
who has it holy and pleasing to God “He,” says S. Augustine {de
Laud. Char.), “ holds both what is patent and what is latent in God's
sayings who holds charity in his daily life”

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER XIII

1 All gifts, 2, 3 how excellent soever, are nothing worth without charity . 4 The

praises thereof, and 13 pr elation before hope and faith .

T HOUGH I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not
charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and
all knowledge 5 and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains,
and have not charity, I am nothing.

3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor , and though I give my
body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind ; charity envieth not ; charity vaunteth
not itself, is not puffed up,

5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked,
thinketh no evil ;

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth ;

7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all
things.

8 Charity never faileth : but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail ;
whether there be tongues, they shall cease ; whether there be knowledge, it shall
vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be
done away.

II When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought
as a child : but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

12 For now we see through a glass, darkly ; but then face to face : now I
know in part ; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three ; but the greatest of these
is charity.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

i. He points out that of all gifts and graces, charity is the first, and that

without charity no gift or virtue is of any use.

ii. He enumerates (ver. 4) the sixteen conditions of charity, or the modes

of its manifestation towards our neighbours.

iii. He shows (ver. 8) the eminency of charity from the fact that it will

remain in heaven, when faith is changed into sight and hope into
fruition.

3*7

Digitized by Google

3 18 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

The whole of this chapter is in praise of charity. The Apostle
treats of charity at such length, not only because charity is the
queen of all virtues, but also because he wishes by charity, as by a
most effectual medicine, to cure the pride and divisions of the
Corinthians; for charity effects that superiors do not despise in-
feriors, and that inferiors do not feel bitter when their superiors are
preferred before them. But, especially, he commends charity to
them as a most excellent gift, that they may seek it rather than the
gift of tongues, or of prophecy, or of miracles, which things the
Corinthians were in the habit of considering most important. And
this is why, in preparing his passage to charity, he said, at the end of
the preceding chapter : “ Covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet show /
unto you a more excellent way? viz., of charity.

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels . Some hold
that the tongue of angels is Hebrew, and that this was the tongue used
by God, the angels, and Adam in Paradise (of which see below, ver. 8).
Secondly, the Glossa , Durandus , Greg. Ariminensis (in 2 dist. 9, qu.
2), and Molina (1 p, qu. 106 art. i.) think from this passage of the
Apostle, that angels speak as men, not only by forms impressed on the
angel who hears, but also by gestures and signs, spiritual signs (since
they are as it were a kind of spiritual conversation and form of
speech), imprinted on them at their creation, as the Hebrew tongue
was imprinted on Adam. Hence Franciscus Albertinus (Lib. Corol -
lariorum Theologicorum Corollario n) says that each angel has his
own proper tongue, different from the tongue of every other angel,
because the Apostle says, “Though I speak with the tongues of
angels,” not with the tongue . But it seems to follow from hence,
that if angels make use of those signs and speak to one, they cannot
conceal them from others ; for nothing natural can practise conceal-
ment but only that which is free ; but these signs are natural, im-
printed on them with their nature at their creation. Whence others,
with S. Thomas, think that angels speak in this way, that they direct
their thoughts to another, and form a wish to make them known to
him, and that then, from the meet appointment of God and their
meeting, a proportionate object is formed, and that this is placed as it

Digitized by Google

THE TONGUES OF ANGELS

319

were within a sphere of knowledge, and becomes intelligible to him,
to whom they wish to speak, and not to another ; so that he and
and none else sees and understands this object, placed as it were
before his eyes; from which some conclude that angels by their
nature cannot lie. But the contrary seems truer, viz., that thay can
lie ; because angels can form in their intellect a concept that is false,
and opposed to the judgment of their mind, and can direct it to
the other, to whom, in this way, they speak : even as man forms a
false mode of speech and one opposed to his judgment when he lies.
For angels do not exhibit to the sight of others the very acts of their
will in themselves, that is, the very volitions and intentions, but they
form in their mind concepts of these actions, whether true or false,
just as they will, and represent them to him to whom they speak.
But we may leave these points to be more thoroughly disputed and
settled by the Schoolmen.

The tongues of angels mentioned here are not therefore addressed
to the senses, as Cajetan thinks, but to the intellect, since these
tongues are the very concepts of angels, most perfect and most
beautiful. The tongues of angels is certainly a prosopopoeia and
hyperbole, that is, it denotes a most exquisite tongue. So we say
in common phrase, “ He speaks divinely ; ” by a similar hyperbole
it is said “ the face of an angel,” that is, a most beautiful face. So
Theodoret and Theophylact speak, because, as we know, angels are
most beautiful in themselves, and show themselves such, both in
appearance and speech, when they assume a body. So therefore
Paul here, as elsewhere afterwards, speaks on a supposition by
hyperbole, chiefly for the sake of emphasis. His meaning is — If
there were tongues of angels surpassing the Hebrew, Greek, Latin,
and I knew them, but yet did not use them for the good of my
neighbour, what else would it be but an empty and noisy wordiness ?
So GaL i. 8 ; Rom. viiL 39. Paul here points at the Corinthians,
who were wont to admire the gift of tongues more than other gifts.

A tinkling cymbal, giving forth an uncertain and confused sound.
The Greek aXakdfav is an onomatopoeia, and denotes sounding
“alala, alala.” So Apion Grammaticus, because of his garrulity, was

Digitized by Google

320 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

called “the cymbal of the world” (Suetonius, Lib . de Prceclaris
Grammaiicis).

Ver. 2. — Though I have all faith , so that I could remove mountains ,
and have not charity , I am nothing. Erasmus thinks that this is a
hyperbolic fiction, as though he should say, “ Charity by far excels
faith,” just as we say, “Virtue alone is the only nobility.” But this
is far too cold ; for in the following verse, speaking of almsgiving
and martyrdom if charity is wanting, he says, it profiteth me nothing .
Therefore, I am nothing imports I am of no value, and have no
grace in the presence of God ; and in truth, because the righteous
man is of some account before God, the rest of men, being un-
righteous, are, in the eyes and estimation of God, as nothing. In
other words, without charity nothing profiteth, nothing makes friend-
ship with God ; there is nothing which wins for a man righteousness
and salvation, not even faith, though it be most great and most
excellent, so that it can remove mountains, such as Gregory Thau-
maturgus had, who, by his faith, moved a mount from its place,
that he might make a place to build a church, as Eusebius narrates
(Hist. lib. 7, c. 25).

You will say, therefore, If a penitent exercises himself in good
works before reconciliation, they profit him nothing. Some answer
that they profit him, because the penitent, they say, has charity —
not infused charity which makes righteous, but that charity which
is a sincere love towards God, by which he longs for reconciliation.
But this affection is not and cannot be called charity ; for Holy
Scripture, here and elsewhere, calls charity that most eminent
virtue, greater than faith and hope, which makes us friends of God.

Secondly, because the affections of fear, hope, and faith dispose
to righteousness, therefore they are something, even without the
affection of that love. I reply, Good works profit the sinner who
repents nothing, unless charity follow. For so, he says, almsgiving
profits nothing, as will appear in ver. 3. For disposition by itself
is useless and of no account unless there follow the form to which it
disposes ; therefore works without charity are nothing, that is, they
confer no righteousness or salvation ; and a rpan without charity is

Digitized by Google

FAITH DEVOID OF CHARITY

321

nothing so far as the spiritual being is concerned, in which, by super-
natural regeneration, he receives a supernatural and Divine being,
and is made a new creature of God, a son and heir of God. Hence
it follows that faith alone does not justify.

Beza replies that here faith which works miracles alone is in
question ; for justifying faith, which lays hold of the mercy of God
in Christ, can be separated from charity indeed in thought, but not
in reality, any more than light from fire. But on the other hand,
since faith which works miracles includes and presupposes faith
properly so called, which is the beginning of justification (nay, faith
which works miracles is the most excellent faith, as the Apostle here
signifies when he says : “ Though I have faith so that I could re-
move mountains”), therefore, if faith which works miracles can exist
without charity, it will also be able to be justifying faith. Secondly,
the Apostle says “all faith,” which Beza dishonestly translates “whole
faith : ” if all, therefore also justifying.

Thirdly, the Apostle teaches us (vers. 8 and 13) that faith and
hope, both theological and justifying, remain in this life only, while
charity remains also in the future life ; therefore faith is separated
from charity. So Chrysostom, Anselm, Theophylact, and others; and
especially S. Augustine ( de Trin. lib. xv. c. 18) says: “Faith, accord-
ing to the Apostle, can be without charity ; it cannot be profitable;”
and in his sermon on the three virtues — faith, hope, and charity
(tom. x.), he speaks of charity alone, “that it distinguishes between
the children of God and the children of the devil, between the
children of the Kingdom and the children of perdition ; ” and again
{Lib. de Naturd ei Gratid , c. ult.) he says : “Charity begun is right-
eousness begun ; charity increased is righteousness increased ; charity
perfected is righteousness perfected.” See Bellarmine {de Justified •
tionty lib. i. c. 15). What faith which works miracles is I have said
(chap. xii. 9); why the operation of miracles is to be attributed to
faith D. Thomas teaches {de Potentid, qu. 6, art 9).

Ver. 3. — And though I bestow all my goods \ The Greek verb
signifies to put into the mouths of children or the sick bread,

or food, in crumbs as cut up, as I have said (Rom. xii. 20);

vol. 1. x

Digitized by Google

322 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

here, however, it denotes to expend all one’s substance for such a
purpose.

Though I give my body to be burned, \ and have not charity, it pro-
fiteth me nothing. You will say, Martyrdom, then, can be without grace
and charity, with sin and damnation. Note firstly, as one can
give alms, so one can hand over one’s body in different ways and
from different motives, e.g., for one’s country, for one’s neighbour,
for correction of the body, from vain glory, or again for the faith,
for the love of Christ and of God — and then it is martyrdom.
Secondly, martyrdom is an act springing from the virtue of fortitude,
ordered often by charity ; still it can be ordered* not by charity, but
by another virtue, as by religion or obedience ; e.g., if a man offer
himself to martyrdom, that he may honour God or obey Him. These
actions, however, flow from a general love of God. Thirdly, martyr-
dom, from whatever virtue springing, confers justifying grace, even
the first, from the mere fact of its being wrought, as theologians
teach ; and consequently it confers charity, nor can it be separated
from it as from its end.

I say, then, firstly, that the Apostle speaks in general terms of any
hahding over of the body to be burned : Whether any one does
it for his country, as Mucius Scsevola did, who, wishing to kill King
Porsena when he was besieging Rome, made a mistake, and fell
into the power of his enemies ; then, to show how little he shrank
from death for his country, he burnt his hand, “ In order that you
may know,” he said to Porsena, “ how vile is the body in the eyes of
us who look for glory ; ” or whether he do it for empty fame, as
Peregrinus did, who, to obtain for himself an immortal name, threw
himself at the Olympic games on a pyre to be consumed, as Lucian,
an eyewitness, testified; or whether any one commit himself to
fire for the faith of Christ, while at the same time keeping hatred of
his neighbour, or a desire to commit mortal sin : which martyrdom
is material, not formal ; for it is then without charity and profiteth
nothing, as D. Thomas, Anselm, and Theodoret say.

Hence, I say secondly, that the Apostle also speaks of giving the
body in material and formal martyrdom, but hypothetically, i.e., if

Digitized by

Google

MARTYRDOM WITHOUT CHARITY

323

martyrdom could be without charity it would profit nothing. So S.
Chrysostom and Theophylact Whence Theodoret and S. Basil (Efts.
75 ad Neoccesarienses) remark that there is here a hyperbole. But, if
you wish, the Apostle speaks, not merely hypothetically, but absolutely.

I say thirdly, martyrdom antecedently, whether from the mere
fact of being wrought, in so far as its work is regarded in itself, or
in so far as the merit of him who suffers martyrdom is regarded, can
be without charity, e.g. % if one living in mortal sin is willing to die
for the faith of Christ, when as yet he has not charity, martyrdom
profits him nothing. Nevertheless, in consequence, from the mere
fact of its being wrought, in his end martyrdom always brings
charity; for, from the very fact that any one, even a sinner, is killed
for the faith, charity and righteousness are infused into him as if
from the very act itself, and in this way martyrdom eminently profits.
In this way, therefore, the sense of the Apostle will be, Martyrdom
profiteth nothing unless charity go before, follow after, or accompany
it, whether as the source or the end and effect of martyrdom. So
D. Thomas, Cajetan, and Francisco Suarez (p. 3, qu. 69, disp. 29, sec
2). Anselm says: “Without charity nothing profits, however ex-
cellent ; with charity everything profits, however vile, and becomes
golden and Divine.”

It profiteth me nothing. I am not helped, I receive no benefit,
i.e., towards justification and salvation. So Ephrem. “So great is
charity that, if it be wanting, other things are reckoned vain ; if it
be present, we possess all,” says S. Augustine (tom. iii. Sententia , 326).

Ver. 4. — Charity suffiereth long and is hind. Ambrose reads:
“Charity is high-souled” (so also S. Cyprian and Tertullian, de Patien -
//<$, c. 12, read), “ and is pleasing.” Note, charity is long-suffering, not
formally, but in the way of cause, because it produces patience and
kindness; because patience, as well as kindness, is an act not elicited
but ordered by charity. Tertullian (de Patientid , c. 2) beautifully
teaches that no virtue is perfect which has not patience as its com-
panion, and so in all the beatitudes which Christ (in S. Matt, v.)
enumerates, patience also must be understood. He teaches also
(c. 12) that the treasures of charity are held in by the discipline of

Digitized by Google

324 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

patience, and that charity herself is taught by patience as her
mistress; for, expounding these words of the Apostle, “charity
suffereth long,” he says : Love, the great mystery of the faith, by
whose training is she taught save by that of patience f Love? he,

says, “ is high-souled , so she adopts patience ; she does good, so patience
works no evil; envieth not — that also is the property of patience;
savours nothing of wantonness — she has drawn her modesty from
patience ; is not puffed up, behaves not unseemly — for that belongs not
to patience. But what would he have left to impatience f Therefore he
says , 4 Love beareth all things, endureth all things 9 that is, because she is
patient?

Hence S. Augustine (de Moribus Eccl. c. 15) then defines fortitude:
“ Fortitude is love bearing easily all things for God's sake.” In like
manner he defines by love the three other cardinal virtues, that
they are different forms of love. “ We may say? he says, “ that
temperance is love preserving itself pure and uncorrupt for God; that
justice is love, serving God only , and for the same cause duly ordering
other things which have been placed under man ; that prudence is love,
rightly discerning between those things by which God is served, and
by which His service is hindered? Again (c. xxiL) he says : “ That
love which we must have towards God, inflamed with all holiness , is
called temperate in things that ought not to be sought for, and brave in
things which can be lost? And shortly afterwards : “ There is nothing
so hard, so steely, which cannot be overcome by the fire of love. By love,
when the soul hastens towards God, rising above the defilement of the
flesh, it will fly, freely and wonderfully, on most beautiful and most
chaste wings, by which pure love strives for the embrace of God? Every
virtue therefore is love and charity, viz., an act of charity not elicited
but ordered, because it is ordered, directed, formed, and perfected
by charity. Add to this that virtue by itself is love of good. Such
was the charity of Christ on the Cross towards His crucifiers, about
which S. Bernard ( Sermon de Passione Domini ) says: 11 He was
smitten with scourges, crowned with thorns, pierced with nails, fastened
to the Cross, laden with reproaches ; yet, heedless of all pains, He cried,
4 Forgive them, for they know not what they do. 9 How ready art

Digitized by Google

CHARITY THE FOUNDATION OF ALL VIRTUES 325

Thou to forgive , O Lord ! How great is the multitude of Thy sweet
mercies l How far are Thy thoughts from our thoughts l How is Thy
mercy established on the wicked / A wondrous thing t He cries, ‘ For-
give;' the Jews \ 4 Crucify;' His words were softer than butter, and they
are as darts. Oh, suffering charity, but also longsuffering, 4 Charity
suffereth long * — it is enough; 4 charity is kind ' — it is the crowning-point.
Because charity is kind \ she loves also those whom she tolerates , and loves
them so ardently And a little lower : * O Jews, ye are stones, but ye
strike a softer stone, from which is given back the sound of piety, from
which pours forth the oil of charity. How, O Lord, wilt Thou give
drink to those who thirst for Thee of the torrent of Thy joy, who so
overwhelmest those who crucify Thee with the oil of Thy mercy l "

Envieth not For, as S. Gregory says {Horn, v. in Evang,), u the
good will which charity begets is one that fears others' misfortunes as its
own, which rejoices in the prosperity of its neighbour as in its own ,
believes other f losses as its own, and reckons other s' gains as its own,"
The reason is, because charity does not regard my things and
thine, but those which are God’s. For, as S. Gregory says (ibid),
44 whatever we desire in this world, we emy to our neighbour for we
seem to lose what another gains. For this cause charity is cold
where lust is bold. On the contrary, when brotherly love reigns,
then lust lives an exile ; for, as S. Augustine says (de Doctr, Christ,
lib. iii. c. 10), “the more the kingdom of lust is destroyed, the more
charity is increased,"

Does nothing wrongly. Perversely, wantonly, maliciously. Some
interpret the Greek, “does not chatter idly," “ Vatablus, “does not
flatter;” Clement (Pcedag, c. il), “ does not paint her face or adorn her
head overmuch.” “ For worship" says Clement, il is said to act unseemly
which openly shows superfluity and usefulness ; for excessive striving
after adornment is opposed to God, to reason, and to charity Cajetan
interprets the word : “ is not inconstant ; ” Theophlact, “ is not head-
strong, fickle, rash, stubborn ; " Ephrem, 44 is not riotous .” Theophy-
lact again, 44 doth not exalt itself ," So also S. Basil seems to interpret
it “ What," he asks, “ does this word (irtpirtpeverai) mean?" which
the Latin translator of Basil renders : “ What do we mean by being

Digitized by Google

326 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

boastful and arrogant without cause He replies: “ That which
is assumed \ not from necessity hut for the sake of superfluous adorn-
ment, incurs the charge of unseemliness.” But from these words it is
evident that the translator has not followed the mind of S. Basil,
and that Basil did not mean boasting and foolish arrogance, but
painting and excessive adornment, as did Clement of Alexandria in the
place just cited. Best of all, Chrysostom understands it : " Charity is
not forward or wanton , as is the carnal love of lascivious men, wanton
women , and harlots .” Whence Tertullian (de Patientia , c. xil) says,
“ Charity makes not wanton.”

Ver. 5. — Is not ambitious. Ephrem translates it : il Does not commit
what is shameful” Clement ( Pcedag . lib. iii. c. 1) : (( Doth not behave
itself unseemly.” Our translator, with Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theo-
phylact, CEcumenius, takes it thus : Charity thinks that nothing is
dishonouring or unbecoming to it, though it suffer or do what is
vile, ignominious, or degrading. Or more shortly : Charity is not
ashamed, because it is ambitious of nothing, and of no honour
Our translator therefore has, from the effect, understood and ren-
dered the cause — the cause why any one is not ashamed is, because
he seeks for no honour or glory. Whence Chrysostom and
Theophvlact think that this is said by Paul against the arrogant
“ Charity ,” says Chrysostom, " knows not what dishonour and disgrace
are ; she covers with her wings of gold the vices of all whom she em-
braces.” So the love of Christ did not spurn or reject harlots,
scourgings, or washing of men’s feet S. Basil understands it (in
Regul. Brev. Reg . 246): " Charity doth not depart from her habit
and form” But CEcumenius : u Charity doth not treat bitterly as a
prisoner the man who is her enemy”

Thinketh no evil \ ie., charity, if she is provoked by any one, does
not reckon up the injury nor seek revenge, but conceals it, excuses
it, forgives it For the Greek word, as Vatablus and the Greeks
understand it, is, imputes not his evil to any one.

Ver. 6 — Rejoiceth in the truth. In the truth, not so much of speech
and mind as of life, i.e., of righteousness. In other words, charity,
when it sees its neighbours living justly and rightly and making

Digitized by Google

IN PRAISE OF CHARITY

327

advance, does not envy them, but rejoices and is glad, as though it
were its own advance, as Anselm says from S. Gregory ; for truth
here is opposed to iniquity. Therefore truth here is equity, upright-
ness, righteousness. The Greeks understand it otherwise : Charity
does not rejoice, but grieves when it sees an enemy suffering anything
wrongly or unjustly ; and it rejoices in the truth if it sees his own
given to him.

Ver. 7. — Beareth all things. Like a beam which sustains an
imposed weight, or rather, like a palm-tree, which does not yield
under its own weight, but, like an arGh, is the more strong. Rightly
says Augustine (in Sententiis , sec. 295) : “ The fortitude of the Gentiles
comes from wordly lust , but the fortitude of the Christians from the
love of God which was shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit,
who was given to us, not by any determination of our own will”

Believeth all things, i.e., charity is not suspicious, but readily gives
credence to others where it can prudently believe without danger of
error. Therefore Paul says, “ beareth all things, believeth all things,
hopeth all things, endureth all things .” That is to say, charity bears
all evils and all injuries, believes and is persuaded of the best about
its neighbour, hopes for ail good things for its neighbour, and

endures from him evil words and blows. So Chrysostom and the
Greeks. Anselm, S. Thomas, and Lyra explain the words differently.
Charity makes us believe what ought to be believed, hope for
what we ought, and await it with patience; for otherwise in
some cases that saying of Seneca is true, “ It is a vice to believe
everything and a vice to believe nothing.” So also S. Augustine
explains it ; and from these words of the Apostle he makes a chariot
for charity, namely, of the four virtues of charity, faith, hope, patience,
perseverance. In his sermon on the four virtues of charity he thus
speaks: “ Every one who devoutly bears rightly believes, and every one
who rightly believes hopes for somewhat, and he who hopes perseveres , lest
he should lose hope ; n for the Apostle in this whole passage is treating
of the offices of charity, not towards God, but towards our neigh-
bour, and is showing how charity manifests itself in all cases to him.

Chrysostom remarks (Horn, xxxiv.) that there are here sixteen

Digitized by Google

328 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

benefits and fruits of charity, which he sets up as remedies for the
diseases of the Corinthians: " Charity , he says, "is patient , con -

demning the quarrelsome ; kind \ condemning the factious and stealthy ;
envies not , against those who are bitter against their superiors ; is not
wanton — he lays hold of the dissolute; is not puffed up — the proud ;
is not haughty , against those who will not abase themselves and serve
their neighbour ; seeketh not her own , against those who despise others ;
is not provoked — thinketh no evil against those who inflict insults ;
rejoiceth not in iniquity , but rejoiceth in the truth, against the envious .
Again , 4 beareth all things ,* is for a solace to those who are hemmed in
by foes and down-trodden ; 1 hopeth all things l is for a solace to those
who are rejected and despaired of; 1 endureth all things and never
faileth' is against those who , for a slight cause , foster divisions S.
Gregory thus describes these offices of charity (Morals, book x.
c. 8) : " Charity is patient ; because it bears calmly all evils that may
be inflicted ; is kind, because it bountifully repays good for evil ; envieth
not, because, from the fact that it seeks for nothing in this present
world, it knows not how to be envious at earthly successes ; is not
puffed up, because, since it eagerly longs for the promised inward re-
ward, it does not exalt itself on the score of outward advantages ; does
nothing amiss, because it confines itself to the love of God and of its
neighbour, and is ignorant of whatever departs from rectitude ; is not
ambitious, because it ardently seeks within for its own perfection,
and covets without no man's goods ; seeketh not its own, because it
disregards, as though they were another's, all things which here for
a brief time it possesses, since it recognises that nothing is its own
save what abides permanently ; is not provoked, because, though stirred
up by injuries, it is roused to no motions of revenge, since for great
sufferings it expects hereafter greater rewards ; thinketh no evil,
because purity stablishes a mind in love, while it plucks up all hatred
by the roots, and cannot dwell in a soul which is defiled ; rejoiceth not
in iniquity, for it yearns with love alone for all, and does not rejoice
in the fall of its enemies ; but rejoiceth in the truth, because, loving
others as itself, it rejoices in that which it sees good in others, as though
it were an increase of its own perfection."

Digitized by Google

IN PRAISE OF CHARITY

329

A soul on fire with charity is like the sky; for as the wide-
spreading sky embraces the whole earth, and warms and fertilises
it by the sun, and waters it by its showers, even places bristling with
thorns, so such a soul embraces with its charity the inhabitants of
the whole earth, though they be barbarians or foes, and does good
to whom it can, and waters and cherishes with its sweetness those
who bristle with the thorns of hatred and of vice.

Ver. 8. — Charity never faileth . It suffers no death ; it will never
cease : other gifts will cease in the heavenly glory. Heretics infer
from this that, if charity never faileth, he who has it cannot sin, and
is assured of his salvation. I reply, I deny the consequence. For
charity never faileth, viz., by itself ; for of its own accord it never de-
serts a man, unless it be first through sin deserted by him. “ Charity ,”
says Cassian ( Collat . iii. c. 7), “ is one who never suffers her follower to
fall by sin supplanting her? So long, therefore, as you give yourself
to charity and will to keep her, you will never sin ; but if you sin, it
is not that charity in itself fails, but you yourself eject her by force.

Whether there be prophecies they shall fail . Not so much because
of their obscurity as because they were here given to meet the im-
perfection of those who heard them, in order that they, being more
Untaught, might be taught by prophecy and tongues. Thus in heaven
faith shall cease, because it is imperfect through lack of evidence,
and hope, because it is imperfect through the absence of the thing
hoped for ; but charity has nothing of these, but is perfect in itself,
and therefore will remain in heaven.

Whether tongues they shall cease He does not say language shall
cease but languages, because in heaven there will be no variety of
tongues, but language there will be ; for we shall with one accord
praise God, not only in mind but also with perceptible language.
Haymo, Remigius, Cajetan here, Galatinus (de Arc. Fidei y lib. xii.
c. 4), Viguerius (in lnstit. c. ix. ver. 8), where he treats of the gift of
tongues, all teach that the one tongue which we shall all use in
heaven will be Hebrew, which Adam used in his state of innocence,
which all the patriarchs, prophets, and saints before Christ, nay,
which the whole world used before its dispersion and confusion of

Digitized by Google

330 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

tongues at BabeL Henee in the Apocalypse, though written in
Greek, it is said that the saints in heaven will sing in Hebrew
“Amen, Alleluia.” For since in heaven all sin will have been
banished, the confusion of tongues will be done away with ; and as
we shall return to the primeval state of innocence, so shall we to
its language, and to the one and first speech. Certainly, if any one
of those tongues which we use on earth remain in heaven, I should
think it would be Hebrew. But it is not plain that any will remain ;
for the Apostle only says that tongues will cease, which may mean
that all which are now in use among men are to cease. Never-
theless, it is consistent with this that in heaven another sensible
tongue may be infused anew into the blessed, a celestial tongue,
one far more perfect than any we have here, one befitting their mouth
and glorified body, and with this they will in a bodily manner praise
God. Whether this be more true, a blessed experience will teach us.
John Salas, (in i, 2, tom. i. qu. 5, art 5, tract 2 disp. 14, sect 14,
n. 106) thinks that is more likely. His reason is that the Hebrew
tongue is wanting in sweetness, fulness, and perspicuity, and there-
fore it is not worthy to be retained after the General Resurrection.
In heaven there will be an elect speech, as Wisdom says (cap. iii. 9),
that is, a special tongue pre-eminently sweet, terse, and perspicuous,
common to all nations, to be taught by God. Hence S. Bernard
says (in Mtdit \ c. iv.) : “ The unwearied rejoicing of all will he with
one tongue,” &c. There will not be in the peace of heaven any
diversity of tongues, viz., for common use. Beyond this, however,
they will speak, when they wish, with other tongues ; for all will
have the gift of tongues, and will know all idioms by Divine revela-
tion. Salmeron and others add that in heaven it is meet for God
to be worshipped with all kinds of tongues ; for it seems to tend
to the greater glory of God, that every tongue confess that our Lord
Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father. And so all tongues
will be one, for they will feel and proclaim the same thing, as Martial
(Epigram i.), in flattery of Caesar, said —

“ The voices of the nations sound unlike, yet they are one,

For you are proclaimed by all, true father of your country.”

Digitized by Google

CHARITY ETERNAL

331

Whether there be knowledge it shall vanish away . This knowledge,
as Chrysostom, Thecdoret, Theophylact say, is that which is im-
perfect, obscure, and enigmatical, as Paul calls it in ver. la, e f g.,
faith and all that depends on faith. Of this kind is our theological
knowledge, which draws its conclusions from the principles of the
faith : all this will cease in heaven. For theology there will be of
a different appearance, being most clear, drawn from the vision of
God and from the clearest principles. So say Cajetan, Molina,
Vasquez, and others, in the beginning of the first part.

Observe that the Apostle is speaking rather of the act of know-
ledge than of its habit ; and therefore he adds : “ For we know in
party and we prophesy in part ; ” and : “ When I was a child 1 thought
as a child; ” and : “ Now I know in party then shall I know even as also
I am known .* Still, from the cessation of the act he leaves it to be
collected that the habit will cease; for the habit will be of no
avail if there is no use for it ; fpr it will not issue in action. And
this he signifies by the words “ shall fail ” and “ shall vanish away,”
which imply that knowledge, prophecy, and tongues, simply, both
as regards act and habit, are to perish. Secondly, Photius explains
the passage not amiss thus : Knowledge, i.e . 9 teaching and learn-
ing shall fail, for in heaven we shall neither teach nor learn.
Thirdly, others say that knowledge here is science, or the use of
scientific terms, by which the realities of faith are illustrated and
explained, by means of natural sciences.

Ver. 9 . — For we know in part and we prophesy in party i.e., im-
perfectly. Ephrem turns it : M We know but little of much ; ” for
the Apostle opposes what is little and imperfect, what we know
partly by reason, partly by prophecy, to what is perfect (ver. 10), i.e.,
to the perfect vision and knowledge of God in himself, and of all
things in God. It is certainly true that the whole being of God,
and all His attributes and perfections, we do not know in this life,
but all the blessed know them, and they alone. He proves this
from the example of a boy, who grows both in age and knowledge.
For the blessed are in knowledge as men, and we in it as boys.
Again, our theological knowledge, though it is certain, is yet hidden

Digitized by Google

332 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

and obscure ; it leans on faith, and for that reason alone it is in
part or imperfect. The blessed, however, know all things clearly
and intuitively, nay, they see and behold face to face.

Ver. n. — When I was a child> that is, one who is now beginning
to say, think, plan, attempt, study, play, and do anything, as our
children are wont to do.

I spake as a child \ I understood as a child \ I thought as a child . I
understood as a child, or felt as a child ; for children have not
wisdom, but feeling. In other words, when a child I thought, and
understood, and felt as a child, but when I became a man I thought
and understood as a man does. So, when that which is perfect is
corner i.e., perfect wisdom in heaven, partial and imperfect know-
ledge, as we have it in this life, shall fail ; so that we who here are
boys in knowledge are to be men in heaven. S. Paul leaves the
remaining part of the likeness to be supplied from the verse before.

Ver. 1 2. — For now we see through a glass in an enigma : but then
face to face . We see, /.<?., God and heavenly things, by which we
may be saved and be happy, as appears from what follows. You
will say : If we see God here in a mirror, we see Him clearly and
not in an enigma, for a mirror exhibits to the eyes, not an image of
the object, as is commonly supposed, but the very object itself, I
reply : It is true that a mirror exhibits to the eyes the object itself,
yet it does so, not by a direct ray but reflected; and therefore it
represents the object, not properly, clearly, distinctly, but as from a
distance, obscure and confusedly. Such is the knowledge of God
and of Divine things which we have in this life, but in heaven we
shall see God as He is, face to face, directly, closely, clearly.

Secondly, the Greek word denotes that which we look through
as a means of seeing anything, such as the spectacles of old men,
an eye-glass, or green glass which is placed over a writing, that it
may help weak eyes in reading, nevertheless, it makes things look
green, dark, and obscure. Such a glass, properly speaking, makes
the letters to be seen, not in themselves immediately, but by an
obscure medium and by a shadowy likeness, or, as the Apostle says,
in an enigma. Such a glass may be meant here.

Digitized by Google

THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY

333

Thirdly, some interpret the word, tl through a screen ; ” for, as
merchants show their wares in their shops through glass screens to
those who pass by, not close at hand and distinctly, but from a
distance, in the mass and confusedly, so does God show Himself to
us in this life.

You will ask, What is this mirror by which we see God and
Divine things here in an enigma? I reply, Firstly, the creatures
which act as a mirror to represent their Creator. So S. Thomas
teaches. Secondly, the phenomena of nature, which are the mirrors
of realities. Thirdly, the humanity of Christ and its mysteries,
which veil and set forth His Divinity. Again, the sacraments and
other rites and ceremonies. So S. Theodoret says : “ In holy baptism
we see a figure of the resurrection ; there we shall see the resurrec-
tion itself Here we see the symbols of the Loris body t there the Lord
Himself ; for so the words face to face imply . We shall see , however ,

not His Divine nature , which no eye can take in , but that which was
assumed of us,” In these last words of Theodoret an error of his must
be guarded against, for he seems to say that in heaven we shall see
the humanity only of Christ, because he says the Divine nature
cannot be seen. But the excuse can perhaps be made that he is
speaking only of corporal vision, of which it is true to say, that with
the eyes of the body we shall see the humanity only of Christ. But
this is outside the mind of the Apostle, for he is treating of the
beatific vision, especially of the Divinity.

In an enigma , i.e, t according to Anselm, by an obscure speech
thought, or imagination. For an enigma is a question which is pro-
posed in involved terms.

Then face to face. He alludes to Moses (Exod. xxxiii. 2 ; Num. xii. 8).

“ Now I know in fart” (imperfectly, as I have said, ver. 9), “ but then
shall I know even as also I am known,” That is, Then in heaven I
shall perfectly know and see God, as He is in His essence, and all
other mysteries of God and the faith, even as He knows me and sees
what I am in my essence. So Anselm, Theophylact, Cajetan, Am-
brose, and Theodoret. “I shall know? he says, “even as lam known?
as a well-known and familiar friend clearly sees the face of his friend.

Digitized by Google

334 first EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIII.

S. Augustine extends these words of the Apostle to a knowledge also
of what takes place here on earth, and of what relates to the state of
any saint Hence he proves from this place that the saints under-
stand in heaven our affairs more perfectly than they once did on
earth ; whence it follows that they hear the prayers with which we
invoke them (de Civ. Dei, lib. xxii. c. $9). Chrysostom and (Ecum.
understand it otherwise. Then, they say, shall I know what concerns
action : I shall hasten to Him through love and righteousness, even
as He prevented and went before me with His grace. Thirdly,
others interpret it thus : Then shall I know with that degree of per*
fection to which I was known and predestinated for eternity by God.
But the first sense is the genuine one ; for he opposes knowledge,
which is clear and full, to that which is in part, i.e., imperfect and
enigmatical.

Ver. 13. — Now abide faith , hope, charity, S. Paul in this chapter
clearly teaches that faith, hope, and charity abide in this present life,
but charity alone in our heavenly country. So the Fathers hold. See
Gregory de Valentia, disp. qu. 5 de Subjecto Fidel \ part 2).

You will say, Irenaeus (ii. c. 47), Tertullian {de Patientid , c. xii.)
understand “now” of heaven; therefore in heaven there will be,
and will abide, both faith and hope.

I reply : These Fathers understand by fakh all sure knowledge,
such as the vision of God ; by hope, a firm adherence to God, as the
object of love, which is the enjoyment of God. For this is what
Tertullian says : “ There abide faith, hope, love : faith which the patience
of Christ had begotten ; hope which the patience of man waits for ; love
which, with God as her teacher, patience accompanies .” But these are
not to the purpose of the Apostle, as is evident.

The greater of these is charity. Greater, ue., the greatest So
Catullus : —

“ O Hesperus , light more fair, which shinest in heaven .*
that is, fairest star.

Hence it is plain that faith is not the confidence of heretics in the
remission of their sins; for that confidence is nothing else but a
strong hope : if it is more it is properly called faith, by which you

Digitized by Google

THE GREATEST OF THESE IS CHARITY

335

believe most firmly that you have been justified and saved, as
you believe that God is; then hope is superfluous. For what you
firmly believe you do not, nor can hope for, as, e.g ., you do not hope
that God is, that Christ suffered for us. For hope which truly is
hope is allied to fear and dread as its opposites ; there is nothing of
this kind in faith. The Apostle just above distinguishes hope or
confidence from faith, and requires in this life hope as well as faith ;
therefore faith is not that confidence of which heretics make their
boast.

Lastly, it is plain that of all virtues charity is the greatest and
most eminent; for, as fire among the elements, gold among the
elements, the empyrean among the heavens, the sun among the
planets, the seraphim among the angels, so shines charity as the
queen among virtues. For charity is the celestial fire which kindles
the souls of all around it : the most glittering gold with which we
purchase our heavenly inheritance; the highest heaven in which
God and the blessed dwell; the sun which illuminates, fertilises,
quickens all ; the seraphic virtue which makes the seraphim glow.
(See on Deut. vL 5.) Beroald says: “As is the helmsman in a
ship, the ruler in a state, the sun in the world, so is love among
mortals. Without a helmsman the ship is shattered, without a ruler
the state is endangered, without the sun the world is darkened, and
without love life is no life. Take love from men, you take the sun
from the world.” Plautinus happily calls love a purifying God, that
is, making all things pure and beautiful.

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER XIV

i Prophecy is commended , 2, 3, 4 and preferred before speaking with tongues , 6
by a comparison drawn from musical instruments . 12 Both must be referred

to edification, 22 as to their true and proper end. 26 The true use of each is
taught , 27 and the abuse taxed. 34 Women are forbidden to speak in the
church.

F OLLOW after charity, and desire spiritual gifts , but rather that ye may
prophesy.

2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but
unto God : for no man understandeth him ; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh
mysteries.

3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation,
and comfort.

4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself ; but he that pro-
phesieth edifieth the church.

5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied : for
greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he
interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I
profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or
by prophesying, or by doctrine ?

7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except
they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or
harped ?

8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the
battle ?

9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood,
how shall it be known what is spoken ? for ye shall speak into the air.

10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of
them is without signification.

1 1 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that
speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual seek that ye may
excel to the edifying of the church.

13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may
interpret

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understand-
ing is unfruitful.

15 What is it then ? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the under-
standing also : I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

336

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER XIV.

337

1 6 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the
room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth
not what thou sayest ?

17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all :

19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding,
that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an
unknown tongue.

20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye
children, but in understanding be men.

21 In the law it is written, With mm of other tongues and other lips will I speak
unto this people ; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them
that believe not : but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for
them which believe.

23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all
speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers,
will they not say that ye are mad ?

24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one un-
learned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all :

25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest ; and so falling down
on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

26 How is it then, brethren ? when ye come together, every one of you hath
a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.
Let all things be done unto edifying.

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most
by three, and that by course ; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church ; and let
him speak to himself, and to God.

29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

30 If any thingbe revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace,

31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be
comforted.

32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of
the saints.

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches : for it is not permitted unto
them to speak ; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the
law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home : for
it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge
that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with
tongues.

40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

VOL I. Y

Digitized by Google

338 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

i. He puts prophecy before the gift of tongues, because (a) it is of great use

in edifying others, and tongues are not, unless some one interpret ;
( b ) because (ver. 21) prophecy is given to the faithful, while tongues are
a sign to them that believe not, and he proves this from Isaiah xxviii.

ii. He gives a rule for the due use of these gifts, and lays down laws to be

observed in the meeetings of the Church for public worship ; amongst
other things he bids (ver. 34) women keep silence always.

The Apostle began in chap. xii. to treat of the various gifts of the
Spirit, which He distributes to whom He wills and as He wills; and
then, to take away all boasting from the Corinthians about these gifts,
and especially about the gift of tongues, he exhorted them, in chap,
xiii., to follow after charity as the queen of all graces and gifts ; he
now, in this chapter, returns to consider these gifts, and points out
that not only charity but also prophecy excels the gift of tongues.

The question arises, What does S. Paul mean in this chapter by
prophecy and what by a prophet ? This is the chief difficulty to be
met with here.

The word “prophet,” properly speaking, denotes one who, by revela-
tion from God, foretells an event before it comes to pass. The word
is of Greek, not Latin, origin, coming from two words denoting to
speak beforehand, as though the prophet saw an event before it
happened. This is the origin of the word. Like most words, it
then acquired a secondary meaning, and was extended to signify one
who reveals the secrets of the heart or other mysteries, and one
especially who knows the will of God, and becomes His interpreter
and messenger to others, and who sees and proclaims the mysteries
of the mind and will of God. So Abraham, from being admitted
to familiar intercourse with God, was honoured with the title of
prophet (Gen. xx. 7).

Hence prophecy generally in Scripture is the power of knowing
more fully and more surely than is given to most men the counsels
and determinations of God, and also of proclaiming them for
the purpose of edifying the Church. This power is inspired by the

Digitized by Google

PROPHETS

339

Holy Spirit into some men, who are hence called prophets. A part
of this power consists in a prevision and prediction of future events,
or even of any hidden things, whether past or future. Another part
of it, and one that is far more important and more exalted, one not
derived from study but inspired by the same Spirit, consists in dis-
coursing more ably and more divinely of the being and attributes
of God. If it were derived from study, it would be knowledge and
doctrine, not prophecy ; and so S. Paul, who received his Gospel,
not from man but by the revelation of Jesus Christ (GaL L 12),
taught and preached rather from a constant flow of prophecy than
of doctrine.

1. They then are called prophets who, under the direction of the
Holy Spirit, forth-tell future events or hidden mysteries.

2. Those teachers only who so exhort to piety are to be called
prophets.

3. Those too received the name of prophets who were borne along
by a Divine impulse to praise God with hymns and to provoke the
people to devotion. So, in 1 Sam. x., the Spirit of God came on
Saul and he prophesied ; and again, in chap, xix., he laid aside his
clothes and lay down naked, singing his prophecies a whole day and
night. Again, since Elijah and Elisha had disciples, who at fixed
times, like men devoted to religion, occupied themselves more
zealously than others in singing psalms, in prayers and praises, in
investigating, meditating on, and teaching the law, and since they
sometimes were carried away by the power of the Spirit, as, eg., he
who anointed Jehu — hence all these were called prophets, and their
sons or disciples were called sons of the prophets. Frequent men-
tion of them is made in 2 Kings. They were especially so called
because among them were some true prophets.

4. Hence the name of prophet is extended to any singers, so that
to prophesy is the same as to play, or to sing anything in praise of
God. So, in 1 Chron. xxv. 1, the sons of Asaph, and of Heman,
and of Jeduthun are said to prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and
with cymbals. Still among them there were prophets indeed, such
as the leaders of the singers, Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun, who,

Digitized by Google

340 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, composed the psalms that
bear their names, as the Hebrews hand down to us by tradition.

(5.) By an abuse of the word, those are called prophets who, under
the influence of some evil spirit, lose their self-control, and utter
idiotic and frensied sounds. So, in 1 Sam. xviii. 9, it is said that
“ an evil spirit of God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the
midst of his house,” he spoke and acted as one demented,
like one filled with frensy. Hence the heathen called their poets
seers and prophets, because they seemed borne along by the irresis-
tible power of the Muses, as, e.g.> the Sibyls in composing and singing
their songs. So Ovid {Fasti, lib. vi. 5.) says —

“ God is within us, enkindling us to song,

And fanning into flame the sparks of heavenly truth.**

So, in Titus, i. 21, the poet Epimenides is called a prophet.

(6.) “To prophesy” also denotes the working of miracles; for
this was the work of prophets, who were holy men, gifted from above,
and like organs of God and of His wisdom and power. So, in
Ecclus. xlviii., the dead body of Elisha is said to have prophesied,
because by its touch it raised a man from the dead (2 Kings xiii. 21).
The word “prophet ” is so used in S. Luke viL 16.

(7.) To prophesy is to confirm prophecy. So, in Ecclus. xhx.,
the bones of Joseph are said to have prophesied after his death, viz.,
when they were carried with the Israelites out of Egypt, and so
testified silently that the prophecy about them was true.

From all these it is evident that prophecy, strictly speaking, is
that gift which was frequently given before Christ came, as well as
in the Primitive church, but which now for the most part has ceased,
and is only vouchsafed to a very few men, for a testimony to their
exceptional holiness. The frequency of such gifts was miraculous,
and came almost to an end with the Apostles ; that is to say, they
are not now given, as then, promiscuously, but to very few and very
seldom. It was the purpose of the Lord that those miracles should
shine forth brightly, to draw the attention of the heathen to the Gospel,
and to convince them of its truth. Now, however, that the faith has

Digitized by Google

ON PROPHECY IN GENERAL

341

been well grounded and the world converted, He withdraws them
and bids the Church depend for her growth and perfection on the
usual instruments of teaching and exhortation. Cf. Jansenius (Con-
cordia, c. 47).

A second question arises, Which of these various meanings does S.
Paul apply here to the word " prophet ? ” Chrysostom and Theophy-
lact say that he uses the word in the strict meaning of “ one who fore-
tells future things.” This was his meaning, they say, in chapter xii.
Theodoret takes prophecy to mean the revelation of thoughts and
other hidden mysteries, and quotes ver. 24 in support of his opinion.

But we should notice that the Apostle is describing in this chap-
ter everything that took place then in the public assemblies of the
Church, and that he includes them all under the names of tongues
and of prophesying. For the Holy Spirit then would fill many in
the Church to sing and speak spiritual songs, hymns, prayers,
collects, and psalms in strange tongues, in the presence of an
unlettered crowd of all sorts of men, just as He did on the day
of Pentecost, as described in Acts il This is supported by S.
Dionysius ( de Div . Nomin. c. 3) and by Tertullian (ApoL 29),
and the Apostle calls this “the gift of tongues,” or “speaking in
tongues.” To others the Holy Spirit would give the power of ex-
pounding Holy Scripture, or of teaching or preaching, or of singing,
or of leading the people in exalted prayer in the vulgar tongue, and
hence, as Chrysostom and Theodoret point out, of manifesting the
secrets of men's hearts, and even of uttering real prophecies. All
these things S. Paul includes here under the name of prophecy,
especially preaching and teaching, and he opposes them to the gift
of tongues. Cf. vers. 4-6, 31, and especially vers. 25, 26. For the
prophets of old time not only foretold future things, but taught
and preached, and mingled with their teaching psalms and prayers.
Therefore the Apostle here puts this kind of prophecy before
tongues, and throughout the whole chapter exhorts them to it, and
gives directions for its due use and its order in the public assemblies
of the Church, both before and after the Eucharist; for in these
assemblies one would expound Holy Scripture, another exhort, a

Digitized by Google

34? FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

third sing a hymn, a fourth a psalm, even sometimes in a foreign
tongue. Cf. Ambrose, Anselm, and Philo [de Essceis). The word
“prophet” has this meaning also in chap. xi. vers. 4, 5.

We must notice too, that S. Paul does not here call all prophets
who simply explain the obscure passages of the Prophets or of Holy
Scripture, .nor . yet all those who teach others or exhort, as some
writers suppose, but only those who do so by the direct inspiration
of the Holy Spirit, and not from learning acquired by laborious
study. This is plain from ver. 30, where he says : “ If anything be
revealed to another, let the first hold his peace,” and from ver. 32 :
“ The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.” By the
name of prophet? ;he means those who were filled with the Holy
Spirit, and received from Him some revelation of doctrine, or word
of exhortation, or of prayer. This was frequently given then, as
appears from ver. 26. But when that influence of the Holy Spirit
ceased, it was succeeded by reading of the Scriptures, preaching,
psalm-singing before the Mass, during the Mass, and after the Mass.
Cf. note on ver. 26.

Ver. 1. — Follow after charity \ Pursue it eagerly so as to obtain it,
just as a huntsman pursues a wild animal.

Desire spiritual gifts . These are, S. Chrysostom says, the gifts of
the Holy Spirit, not His graces, as, eg., the gift of tongues or of heal-
ing, and the others referred to in chap. xi. S. Paul bids them desire
these, try to obtain them, especially by prayer, not from any desire
for superiority but from charity, that they may profit others and the
Church at large by means of those gifts.

But rather that ye may prophesy . Viz., that under the inspiration
of the Holy Spirit ye may teach, say, or sing such things as may stir
up the devotion of others. This has just been seen to be the force of
“ prophecy.”

Ver. 2. — He that speaheth in a tongue , &c. S. Augustine (de
Gen. ad Litt. lib. xil), Primasius, and Cajetan read the nominative
in the last clause of this verse, “Howbeit the Spirit speaketh
mysteries.” The meaning then would be : The Holy Spirit speaks
of hidden mysteries in the Holy Scriptures, which cannot be under-

Digitized by Google

SUPERIORITY OF PROPHECY

34 3

stood, except some prophet or doctor interpret them. But this
meaning is foreign to the context, and this reading is not supported
by the Greek or Latin copies.

Ver. 3. — But he that prophesieth speakcth unto men to . . . comfort
This is what I said before, that to prophesy means here to speak
words which edify, exhort, and comfort others. Hence, to prophesy
is better than to speak in unknown tongues, which no one under-
stands, and from which no one can receive instruction, edification,
or comfort

Ver. 6 . — NoWy brethren, t if I come unto you speaking with tongues
... or by doctrine ? His tongues would profit them nothing unless
he added to them a revelation , that is an explanation of the revelation
given him; or knowledge , that is a declaration of what he knew,
whether infused by God or acquired by study; or prophecy , that is
a statement of what he knew, either by prophecy properly so called
or improperly, in the way of explanation of hidden and difficult
things, especially of Holy Scripture ; or doctrine^ that is an accommo-
dation of his discourse to their capacity. Such is pretty nearly the
explanation given by S. Thomas and Theophylact. To complete
the sense of the verse we must supply : But I shall do nothing of
this sort if I merely speak with tongues and do not interpret, so
that you may understand me; therefore it is better to prophesy
than to speak with tongues, unless some one interpret.

But in the second place we can understand the Apostle’s meaning
still better if we join knowledge with doctrine, and revelation with
prophecy. For, as it was from their stores of knowledge that learned
men drew the teaching that they gave others, so was it from revela-
tion that they prophesied. Prophecy is distinguished from doctrine
in that it is received by revelation, doctrine from knowledge ; for
what we teach has been acquired by intellectual study. So Tolatus
and Jansenius, in the place quoted above, say that S. Paul’s meaning
is, “ Though I speak in unknown tongues, but do not teach you,
whether by knowledge gained by study or by prophecy received by
revelation, I shall profit you nothing.”

Thirdly, Cassianus (Collate iv. 8) sees here the four senses of Holy

Digitized by Google

344 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

Scripture: in the doctrine the literal sense, in the revelation the
allegorical, in the knowledge the tropological, in the prophecy the
allegorical But this is a mystical and symbolic interpretation.

Ver. 7. — And even things without life % &c. That tongues profit
nothing unless they are understood can be seen, even from a com- ‘
parison drawn from inanimate things ; for a pipe or harp are of no
use unless they give a distinct sound. Unless a man knows what
is played he will take no pleasure in the sounds, nor will he be
induced to dance to the music.

Ver. 9. — So likewise ye . . . how shall it be known what is spoken?
For the tongue is the stamp, the image, the index, and messenger of
the mind. As Aristotle says (Peri Hermen . lib. ii.), “ words are signs
of the feelings which lie concealed in the soul.” Hence Socrates
used to determine the mind and character of any one from his voice,
and would say, “Speak, young man, that I may see you.” But this
cannot be if the language of the speaker is unknown to the hearer.

Ver. 10. — There are ) it may be , so many kinds of voices in the world \
and none of them is without signification . As a matter of fact, or
for example, there are many different languages : no nation is with-
out its language, no language without its meaning. Others, as
(Ecumenius, refer the none to the instrument, and say that no pipe
or harp but has its proper sound ; others, more generally, no object
is without its voice. As Ausonius sings to Paulinus : —

“No creature silent is, nor winged bird,

Nor beast that walks the earth, nor hissing snake s
The cymbals smitten sound, the stage when struck
By dancers* feet, the drum its echo gives. ”

The best meaning, however, is that no tongue is void of meaning.

Ver. 11. — I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian. As Ovid
says: —

“ A barbarian here am I, and understood by none.”

The word “ barbarian ” is onomatopoetic, and was first applied by
the Greeks to any one who spoke another language than Greek; then
by the Romans to one who spoke neither Greek nor Latin ; afterwards

Digitized by Google

THE GIFT OF TONGUES

345

it denoted any one who spoke any other tongue but that of his
native country. Hence Anacharsis the Scythian, when ridiculed as
a barbarian by the Athenians, well replied, M The Scythians are bar-
barians to the Athenians, the Athenians just as much barbarians to
the Scythians."

Ver. 12. — Forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts. Since ye
desire to have the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit enumerated in
chap, xii, seek them from God abundantly, that ye may use them,
not for ostentation, but for the perfecting of the Church.

Ver. 13. — Let Mm that speaketh . . . pray that he may interpret
S. Paul is here speaking of public prayer, in which one man, even
though a layman, inspired by the Holy Spirit, would offer up prayer
in an audible voice before all, the others listening, and joining their
prayers to his. This is the meaning, as appears from the following
verses. But Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Anselm explain it thus:
Let him pray that he may receive the gift of the interpretation of
tongues, so as to make his own prayer intelligible to others.

Ver. 14. — For if I pray in an unknown tongue my spirit prayeth.
(1.) My spirit is refreshed; (2.) according to S. Chrysostom, the gift
of the Holy Spirit which is in me prayeth, makes me pray and
utter my prayer in public. (3.) Theophylact and Erasmus, following
S. Basil, understand breath by spirit ; in other words, My voice, pro-
duced by the vital and vocal breath, prays ; but my mind is unfruitful,
because it does not understand the meaning of the words uttered.
Primasius, too, says that the word “ spirit ” here is to be understood
of prayers uttered sometimes while the mind is thinking of some-
thing else. But the first is the true sense, and best fits in with
what follows. S. Thomas, commenting on this clause, gives three
other meanings, but they are not those in the Apostle’s mind.

But my understanding is unfruitful S. Chrysostom, Theophylact,
Ambrose, S. Thomas, and Cajetan think that the Apostle is speaking
here of those who had received the gift of tongues, but who, like
Balaam’s ass, did not understand what they said, or at all events did
not enter into the mysteries contained in their words. S. Augustine
says the same (de Gen . ad Litt '. lib. xii. c. 8 and 9), and it is gathered

Digitized by Google

346 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

from ver. 28. For these prayed without fruit in such tongues; for,
though their spirit fed on God in pious devotion, yet their mind was
not fed on any understanding of the words of the prayer.

But I say that the Greek vovs here is the same as “ meaning.”
It is so rendered in the Latin in ver. 19, and in chap. ii. 16, and in
Rev. xvii. 9, where we read, “Here is the meaning ” (of the vision of the
beast) u which hath wisdom.” S. Paul makes the same distinction
between the tongue and the mind, or the letter and the spirit, which
is so common amongst rhetoricians. “ Sense ” or meaning here is
passive understanding, that by which I am understood by all — not
active, by which I understand things. This “mind,” or significa-
tion of tongues, is without fruit, because no one takes it in, and no
one is aroused to devotion. This is the natural meaning, and S.
Basil seems to hold it (in Reg, Brev . Interrog, 278).

Secondly, (Ecumenius and Theodoret give an explanation which
is not improbable: My mind, or my aim and object, is without
fruit, not on the part of the speaker but the hearer, whom the speaker
strives to excite to piety. It is certain, from vers. 14, 16, and 19,
that S. Paul is speaking of fruit on the side of the hearers ; for he
is speaking of the prayers and spiritual songs which some of the
laity composed under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and uttered
in public, or sang in the church at the time of their spiritual feasts,
for the comfort, instruction, or exhortation of the people. He wishes
them to be said in the vulgar tongue, so as to be understood by all ;
otherwise, he says, they would be fruitless.

You will perhaps say that the Mass and Canonical Hours ought
then to be said now in the vulgar tongue. I deny that this follows,
for the Apostle is speaking of the prayers which any lay person might
compose for the edification or quickening of the people, not of the
public Divine offices, which the clergy now perform with the appro-
bation, not to say at the command, and in the name of the whole
Church, to worship and praise God with a solemn and uniform
majesty in Latin. For if the vernacular tongue were used, it would
come to pass (1.) that the uneducated would not understand Divine
mysteries, or rather they would misunderstand them, and accept

Digitized by Google

PRAYER IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE

347

heretical opinions ; (2.) the language would have to vary with the
countries, or even with the cities. Although all the Germans speak
the same language, yet each province has a different idiom: the
Westphalians have one, the Swiss another, the Hessians another,
and so on. And so if the Divine office were said in the vernacular,
in such a difference of dialects division would arise, and sacred things
would be ridiculed and despised.

You will urge, secondly, perhaps that the people do not understand
Latin : what fruit then have they from the Latin Mass? I answer,
(1.) They participate in the sacrifice and also the sacrament if they
wish to ; (2.) in all the prayers which the priest offers for all men,
and especially for those present ; (3.) they are inflamed by the decent
rites and ceremonies to devotion and elevation of their souls to God
in private prayer, especially since parish priests are bound, by the
Council of Trent (sess. xxii. c. 8), to explain the service to the people
in their sermons. See Bellarmine ( de Verbo . Dei. lib. ii. c. 16).

Ver. 15. — I will pray with the spirit , and I will pray with the
understanding also. I will pray with sense and meaning, intelligibly,
so that others may understand me. S. Paul alludes to Ps. xlvii. 7,
where the same double meaning of understanding on the part of
speaker and hearer is found.

Ver. 16. — Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit , &c. To bless
here is to praise God with heart and mouth. S. Thomas under-
stands it of the public blessing of the people ; so also do Primasius,
Haymo, and Salmeron, the latter of whom strives by many arguments
to prove that the Apostle is speaking here of the sacrifice of the
Mass, in which the priest blesses God rather than the people ; for
the two Greek words for “blessing” and “giving thanks,” used
indifferently by the Evangelists and S. Paul in their accounts of the
institution of the Eucharist, are used here, and seem to point to the
Mass. It hence derives its names of the “ Blessing ” and the “ Eucha-
rist,” or giving of thanks. Add to this that in all the liturgies of
the Mass, including those of S. James, S. Clement, S. Basil, and
S. Chrysostom, after the consecration of the bread and wine, the
people are wont to answer “ Amen ! ” The Apostle, then, seems to

Digitized by Google

348 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

mean here that public blessings, prayers, and Masses should not be
celebrated in the church in an utterly unknown tongue, but that
among the Greeks Greek should be used, among the Hebrews
Hebrew, and among the Latins Latin ; for these languages are for
the most part understood by all who are of each race respectively.
If it is impossible to use one language which is understood by all
the different peoples who hear the same Mass, then one which is the
best known should be selected, such as Latin among us, so that
many “ in the room of the unlearned ” may answer “ Amen ! ” as the
Apostle requires.

But that the Apostle is not speaking of the solemn blessing in
the Mass, but of any other uttered by some private member, under
the direction of the Holy Spirit, in hymn or psalm or prayer, appears
(i.) from the Greek particle (oi else, which, in its meaning of because ,
gives the cause of the preceding verse. The singular, used in “ thy
giving of thanks,” points also to the private and personal devotion
of each of the faithful. (2.) It appears from the drift of the whole
chapter, and especially from the conclusion, stated in ver. 26, “ Let
all things be done to edifying.” (3.) It appears again from ver. 31,
where he says : “ Ye may all prophesy one by one ; ” and from ver. 29 :
“ Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge ; ”
but it was of any one’s fresh and private blessing or prophecy that
they were to judge; for the common prayer and liturgy of the
whole Church, having been approved of by the whole Church, ought
not to be subjected to examination for judgment. All this will
better appear from the next paragraph.

The unlearned. Gagneius, following Severian, says the unlearned
is the catechumen. Primasius says he is a neophyte. Chrysos-
tom, Ephrem, Theophylact, S. Thomas, and others give the best
meaning, viz., one untaught, unlettered, and with no knowledge
of tongues.

S. Thomas, Primasius, and Haymo take the “ unlearned” hereto
be the minister who at Divine service says “ Amen 1” for the people at
the end of the Collects. These Fathers say that S. Paul means that
at all events the minister at the Mass and other sacred rites should

Digitized by Google

PRAYER IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE

349

be able to understand the priest, or him who offers up prayer in
public, in any other language than the vernacular, and should be
able to respond, “ Amen ! ” This is good and fitting teaching, but
not necessarily the one uppermost in the mind of the Apostle.

But the " unlearned ” here denotes, not some minister of the sacred
rites, but any one of the laity. The Greek gives us, “he who sits
among the unlearned ” that is, is himself unlearned. Prophets and
teachers used to sit in one place, the lay people in another. This is
the explanation given by Chrysostom and Theophylact Justin
{Apol. 2) says that the whole of the laity, and consequently any
individual of it, was wont to answer “Amen ! ” Hence S. Jerome, to-
wards the end of his commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, says
that the people used to answer “ Amen ! ” with a noise like thunder. A
minister now says it for the people, so as to prevent a confused
murmuring.

The Apostle is speaking here, we must notice once more, of the
extempore prayer of the individual, uttered for the purpose of edify-
ing, and which might possibly contain some doctrinal error, as is
hinted in ver. 29. He directs that in such prayers the vulgar be
used, so that the people may not answer “ Amen ! ” to a prayer in an
unknown tongue which is meaningless, absurd, or heretical. He is
not speaking of prayers approved by the Church, which for that
very reason are free from error, to which a single minister makes
reply, and to which the people can add private prayers of their
own. Moreover, the Council of Trent orders that sometimes, instead
of the sermon, these prayers be explained to the people.

Again, it is lawful to pray in a language not understood by the
person who prays, if you are certain that the prayers are good ones,
as, eg, when nuns say the Canonical Hours in Latin. In the same
way the laity, when the priest offers up prayers in Latin, can pray
with him, and add the intention of seeking that the priest may ob-
tain for himself and all the people what he asks in the name of the
Church in the beautiful prayers provided. And even if they do not
understand them, and get no nourishment for their understanding
from the meaning of the prayers, yet they reap the fruit of devotion

Digitized by Google

3 SO FIRST EPISTLE TO TIIE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

to God, and of reverence towards the prayers ; nay, they merit and
obtain more than those who understand them if they pray with more
humility, piety, and fervour.

S. Jordanes, when asked whether such prayers as these of nuns
were pleasing to God, well replied : “Just as a jewel in the hand of
a peasant who knows not its value is worth as much as if it were in
the hand of a goldsmith or jeweller who knew its value , so too prayers
in the mouth of one who does not understand them are worth as much
as if they were uttered by one who knew their meaning” A petition
presented to a kin^- by an ignorant peasant would obtain as much
consideration as one presented by a learned man ; for it is written :
“Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings Thou hast perfected
praise;” and again, “If these should hold their peace, the stones
would immediately cry out” (S. Matt xxi. 16 ; S. Lukexix. 40). In
the same way, in the “ Lives of the Fathers,” Abbot Pastor is related
to have said to one who complained to him, that though he prayed
he felt no contrition, because he knew not the meaning of the words
that he used : “ Do you none the less persevere in prayer , for like as
a charmer sings words which the snake hears but understands not, and
yet is subdued and tamed by them , so when we use words whose mean-
ing we know not, the devils hear them and understand them, and are
terrified and driven away” Cf. S. Thomas and Cajetan.

The case is different with the Lord’s Prayer, which every one
ought to learn and intelligently use in the vernacular, that he may
know exactly what he should ask of God, as has been often laid
down in synods. Cajetan, on the other hand, gathers from this pas-
sage that it is better for organs, and musical instruments generally,
to be excluded from church services, in order that the Hours and the
Masses may be sung so as to be understood, and so that the people
may be able to answer " Amen I ” But the practice of the Church is
against this, which makes use of organs and other musical instru-
ments in Divine service, as David did, to stir up the devotion of the
people, who just as little understand the Latin language. The Church
does this for three reasons : (1.) as we join in praising God, not
only in spirit but also in body, so we should praise Him, not only

Digitized by Google

PRAYER IN AN UNKNOWN TONGUE

351

with the best music of the voice, but also of instruments ; for every
spirit, every creature, every instrument ought to praise Him whose
due never can be reached. (2.) To arouse the listeners, and especi-
ally the uneducated, to religious fervour, as David and Elisha were
enkindled by psalms and harps, and as Saul was stirred up by music
to give God praise. (3.) That the beauty, solemnity, and majesty of
Divine service may be the greater. Prudentius, in his Apotheosis ,
written against the Jews, and the Faculty of Paris, in its decree (tit
xix. prop. 6), explain this verse thus : When St. Paul says that in
the church he would rather speak five words with his understanding
than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue, he is speaking of
sermons addressed to the people, in which a flow of words void of
thought is useless. He says nothing about Church canticles, which
are governed by another law.”

Nevertheless, we must in these matters guard against lightness, as
the Council of Trent bids. Hence S. Augustine {Horn, in Ps. xxxiii.)
says that pipes and organs used in theatres had been rejected by the
Church, because the heathen used them then for lust in the theatres,
and for banquets, and at their sacrifices. But, following the example
and injunctions of David, we may use organs and other musical in-
struments, if it be done with piety, soberness, and gravity (cf. Ps. cl.).
S. John, too (Rev. v. 8, and xiv. 2), heard in heaven, where all are
perfected, harps, though of course more solemn and Divine than
ours on earth.

Amen , . Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodoret have translated this
faithfully or truly ; the Septuagint, so be it “Amen ” signifies truly
or even firmly. It is not the expression of an oath, but of one who
affirms or confirms. It is used as an affirmation when it is put at
the beginning of a sentence, as, e.g, “Amen, Amen, I say unto you.”
And in this sense S. Augustine (in Joan, Tract . 41) calls “ Amen ” the
oath of Christ, because Christ’s oath was not strictly an oath but a
simple affirmation. It is a mark of confirmation when put at the end
of a prayer, or it signifies the consent of the hearer ; it sometimes
marks an assertion and agreement, sometimes a wish. It stands
for agreement in Deut xxvii., where the people are bidden to answer

Digitized by Google

352 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

“Amen” in token that they were willing to accept the blessings for
keeping the law and the curses for breaking it. But in a prayer, as,
e.g, in the Lord’s Prayer, it merely denotes a wish that what is
sought for in the prayer may be obtained. The Rabbinical writers
say that there are two “ Amens,” one perfect and the other imperfect in
three ways : (i.) that of a pupil, when “Amen” is said, not as though the
prayer is understood, but it is left to the direction of another to
dictate it, as it were ; (2.) when the “ Amen ” is said before the end of
the prayer it is called “surreptitious,” (3.) and “divided” when the
answer is given by one who is not thinking of the prayer, because he
is occupied with something else.

Ver. 18. — I thank my God \ I speak with tongues more than ye
all \ The Latin rendering is, " I speak with the tongues of you all,”
which suggests the question, What could be S. Paul’s meaning in
this, since there was but one tongue in Greece, and at Corinth in
particular, viz., Greek ? Haymo’s answer is that he refers to the dif-
ferent dialects of Greek. A better answer would be, that foreigners
and merchants of all nations flocked to Corinth as a great emporium,
just as to-day, at Antwerp, Venice, or Paris, we find the commerce
and language of the French, Italians, and English, and other nations,
and that S. Paul is therefore referring to the different languages to
be heard in the streets of Corinth. But Ephrem, Chrysostom,
Jerome {ad Hedibiam\ and others support the rendering of the
text. All the tongues that you speak and more I speak : I do not
extol, I do not condemn the gift of tongues, for I use it myself, but
I do not use it, as you do, for ostentation, but to edification.

Ver. 19. — Yet in the church I had rather speaks &c. A very few
words spoken so as to be understood are better than a multitude of
foreign words not understood by the hearer.

Notice (1.) that understanding is to be taken here passively, and
denotes the meaning by which I and my speech are understood;
hence he adds, “that I might teach others also.” For there is a
contrast between the meaning, and the foreign tongue understood
by no one. See note to ver. 14. But (2.) Anslem takes it of the
active understanding, that by which I myself understand what I say,

Digitized by v^,ooQle .

CHILDREN IN MALICE

353

and so can better explain it to others. (3.) Chrysostom says that it
means with judgment — that he would rather speak and teach with
tact and judgment, so that the hearers, no matter how rude and un-
cultured they might be, might take in and retain what he said. But
the first sense is the best, and most to the point.

Ver. 20. — Brethren, be not children in understanding. Understand-
ing here is not the same word in the Greek as in the preceding
verse. It can, with Chrysostom and Ephrem, be rendered “ mind.*

— Do not become children in mind, judgment, and reason, so as to
display your gift of tongues as children might.

Howbeit in malice be ye children . Chrysostom, Theophylact, and
Ephrem render this: “Let malice be as unknown to you as to
infants.” So, too, S. Augustine (qu. lxi. lib. 7 3) says : “ Be, like
infants, free from malice.” As “infant” is derived from in, “not,”
and fans, “ speaking,” and as a child who cannot speak knows still
less of malice or anything else, so too the Christian is to be an infant
in evil, not to know it nor to be able to speak of it, e.g., not to know
what emulation, defilement, fornication are. So Theophylact, follow-
ing S. Chrysostom. Tertullian ( contra Valent lib. ii.) beautifully
says : “ The Apostle bids us after God be children again, that we may
be infants in malice through our simplicity , and at last wise in under-
standing .” Clement of Alexandria (Peed. lib. i. c. 5) has pointed
out that “children” here is not synonymous with “fools.” The
whole of his chapter, in which he points out how all Christians
should be children-, may be studied with advantage.

Ver. 21. — In the law. Viz., Isa. xxviii. 1 1. As Chrysostom remarks,
the law is sometimes used to denote, not merely the Pentateuch, but
also the Prophets and the whole of the Old Testament.

It is written , With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak
unto this people . This is a difficult passage, and to understand it we
must explain the passage in Isaiah cited by the Apostle. The pro-
phet’s meaning in vers. 9 and 10 is, that God is wont to teach know-
ledge and wisdom to those who have left childish delights and an '
immature age, and are men with the capacity for knowledge; but

these Jews, who (ver. 7) take delight in the pleasures of wine and in

VOL. i. z

Digitized by Google

354 first epistle to the corintiiians, c. xiv.

drunkenness, are like children — do not take solid food — and are
consequently unfitted for doctrine and true wisdom. Filled with
wine, they scoff at me and at other prophets who denounce to them
punishments from heaven for their drunkenness and other sins, and
they say: “Precept must be upon precept, line upon line . . .
here a little and there a little.”

S. Jerome and Hay mo point out that in this passage there is an
ironical play upon words. Isaiah and other prophets were often say-
ing, “Thussaith,”or, “Thus ordereth the Lord.” Hence thejews,when
drunken over their cups, would repeat in derision, “ Order and order
again ” (precept upon precept), “ Expect and expect again” (line upon
line). It was as if they had said : “The prophets are always dinning
into our ears, ‘Thus saith the Lord/ and are always threatening or
promising things which never come to pass, bidding us expect here
a little and there a little, and nothing comes of it ail.” The same is
oftentimes the experience of preachers, that the wicked ridicule,
repeat, and sneer at their sermons and threatenings. Rabbi David,
Rabbi Abraham, and after them Vatablus, Isidorus, Clarius, Pagninus,
and Forterius give a very cold rendering to this verse (io) — “precept
upon precept, line upon line, here a little and there a little.” The
meaning then is : “ These Jews are taught roughly and gradually line
upon line, just as boys are taught their alphabet.” But the following
verses show that the prophet had in his mind scoffers and mockers,
not untaught boys, for the punishments threatened are against
scomers. S. Paul renders the sense of Isaiah and not the exact words :
he applies the passage of Isaiah to the gift of tongues bestowed on the
Apostles, who spoke with other tongues, not to scoff but to edify.

The sense then is: God, speaking by Isaiah, says : “My exhortation
to repentance, given by Isaiah and other prophets, seemed to you, O
Jews, troublesome and ridiculous, just as if I had spoken to you with
inarticulate sounds or in a foreign tongue ; hence you imitate what
seem to you the meaningless sounds of the prophets, and you repeat
in mockery their words. Wherefore, by the Chaldeans, who seem
to you stammerers and lispers, will I punish you, that they, as the
ministers of My righteousness, may restrain your unbelief by the

Digitized by Google

TONGUES AS A SIGN

355

strange sounds of their foreign tongue, and may ridicule you as their
captives, and in their language mock and condemn your Hebrew
words ; and they shall serve as a type of the Apostles, whom in the
time of Christ I will send to reprove your equal unbelief then, by the
gift of unknown tongues, and they shall seem to you as men that lisp
or speak indistinctly, and they shall be scoffed at by you and the wise
of this world as foolish preachers of the Cross of Christ.”

The literal meaning of Isaiah refers to his own time, and to the
Chaldeans who were to overthrow Jerusalem; the allegorical refers
to the gift of tongues given to the Apostles for a sign, not to the
faithful, but to unbelievers, of the malediction with which God
punishes the incredulous, not of the benediction with which He
teaches His own servants. This verse of S. Paul shows the sense
of Isaiah. Cf. S. Jerome and Cyril on Isa. xxviii.

Ver. 22. — Wherefore tongues are for a sign . . . to them that
believe not Viz,, to the unbelieving Jews, both here and in Isaiah
xxviii, rather than to the Gentiles. This sign must therefore not
be used by the faithful for vain glory.

Prophesying serveth not for them that believe not , but for them which
believe . The teaching of the word of God and exhortation are a
sign of the blessing with which God trains up His servants, and stirs
them up to every good work (see ver. 3). Sign here is not the same
as “ miracle,” for the Chaldeans worked no miracle when in their
own tongue they chided the Jews \ but sign stands for a symbol, and
mark of reproof, teaching, and exhortation. But understand what
has been said of the believing and unbelieving, as applying to them
primarily and principally; for in a secondary sense tongues serve
for a sign to the faithful, and prophecy to the unbelievers. Cf. vers.
23 and 25.

Vers. 23, 24. — If therefore the whole church, . . . he is judged of
alt If all speak together confusedly and noisily, they will seem to
be mad; but if all teach the faith from the Scriptures and other
authorities, and preach of the way to lead a right life, the outsider
will be convinced of, and reproved for, his unbelief and evil life, by
all the teachers and preachers.

Digitized by Google

356 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

Ver. 25. — And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest. Out
of the gift of discerning of spirits, or because God directs the tongue
of the prophet, i.e., the preacher, the most hidden sins of his heart
will be described and reproved, and the man will think that the
preacher speaks as a prophet to him in particular. It is evident
from this that this was a common occurrence ; it is also evident that
these teachers and preachers were, strictly speaking, real prophets.

There is a parallel case in the life of S. Augustine by Possidonius
(c, 15), where it is said that on one occasion S. Augustine left
the subject that he had decided to speak on, and discoursed on
Manichaeism. This led to the conversion of a certain Manichaean,
who chanced to be present, as S. Augustine afterwards learnt He
believed it to be due to the direct guidance of God. Hence (de
Doci. Christ, lib. iv. c. 15) he says that prayer should always be
offered to God before preaching, that He would direct the mind and
tongue of the preacher suitably to the capacity and disposition of
the audience.

Others, however, understand “ the secrets of his heart ” to mean
the sins which the unbeliever or unlearned has, but which he does
not know to be sins, e.g., when he does not know that idolatry and
fornication are sinful. He will learn this when he hears the prophet
discoursing about them, and condemning them as sinful. But the
first meaning is the best.

Ver. 26. — How is it then , brethren ? . . . Let all things be done
unto edifying. “ Every one of you ” is, of course, distributive. It is
not meant that each one had all these things, but one had one thing,
another another. Whoever of you has a psalm, or a doctrine, or a
revelation, or an interpretation, or the gift of tongues, let him sing
the praises cf God, or pour forth his prayers and other devotions.

Hath a psalm. The grace of composing and singing psalms or
hymns. So Pliny writes to Trajan that the Christians were wont
to sing hymns before dawn to Christ as God.

Hath a revelation . A revelation and exposition, either of some
difficult passage of Holy Scripture, or of some future or unrevealed
event.

Digitized by Google

ORDER OF DIVINE SERVICE

357

We should notice from this passage that in the Primitive Church
the rites and order of Divine Service, instituted by Paul and the other
Apostles, were somewhat as follows : (i.) Psalms were sung by all ;
(2.) the Holy Scriptures were read; (3.) the Bishop preached;
(4.) then followed the Eucharist, which at that time consisted of
simply the oblation, the consecration, communion, the canon and
Lord’s Prayer, and some collect to which the people answered,
“Amen.” (5.) All communicated ; (6.) some, inspired by the Holy
Spirit, would utter or sing, in different tongues, psalms or hymns
to the praise of God, others would prophesy; (7.) some, after the
Jewish fashion, would interpret the Holy Scriptures or give an ex-
hortation, and that by two or three, especially prophets or men full
of the Spirit ; others would listen and then ask questions about what
had been said. This was done even by the women, though this was
an abuse corrected by S. Paul ; and when anything particularly good
or pious was said, they would all exclaim together, " Amen, amen ! ”
(8.) All was concluded with the agape, which was a common feast
and a symbol of brotherly love, after which prayers and hymns again
were used. Justin, in the passage quoted below, enumerates all
these in order. He says: “In all the oblations which we offer we
praise with thanksgiving ” (the first part) “the Maker of all , through
His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit ; and on the day called
Sunday there • is an assembly of all who live in town or country, and
the commentaries of the Apostles or writings of the Prophets are read”
(the second part). “ Then when the reader ceases , he who presides
delivers a sermon , in which he instructs the people, or exhorts them to
practise the good things they have heard ” (the third part). “ Upon
this we all rise together and offer up prayers, and as I have said,
when the prayers are finished, bread is offered with wine and water ;
and the same president, as far as he can, offers up prayers and thanks-
givings, and the people answer with acclamation, * Amen / * ” (the fourth
part). “ Then there is made a distribution, and communication with
thanksgiving to each one present, of the gifts, and the same is sent by
means of the deacons to the absent ” (the fifth part) — Justin (Apol.
ii. ad Ant.). The sixth, seventh, and eighth parts are described

Digitized by Google

358 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

indiscriminately by Tertullian ( Apol. xxxix.) : “ Our supper shows
its nature by its name of agape , which denotes love. We do not sit
down to it without first praying to God. Then follows washing of
the hands , lights are brought in , and as each one is able from the
Holy Scriptures or his own gifts , he utters praise aloud , and the feast
is ended also with prayer” Philo (de Essceis) gives a similar account.

We must notice, secondly, that these gifts and this fervour were
of short continuance. Still, the Church has retained as far as
possible the order and method then observed. Hence our present
customs are the legitimate descendants of the eight mentioned
above.

1. To the saying of psalms, &c., have succeeded the Hours of
Mattins, Lauds, and Prime.

2. To the prophecies, readings with exposition and homilies, not
only in the Hours, but also in the Mass, in the form of the Epistle
and Gospel

3. After the Gospel comes the sermon.

4. Now as then we have the Mass, in which, at the end of the
collect, a clerk says “ Amen 1 ” for the people.

The fifth, as well as the sixth, seventh, and eighth, have fallen
somewhat into abeyance, except that hymns and the Lesser Hours are
sung after Mass, and that monks, in their assemblies for worship,
are wont to discourse of spiritual things, as Cassian relates ( Collat .
Fatrum).

Ver. 27. — If any man speak in an unknown tongue. ... let one
interpret. This verse depends on the foregoing clause, “Let all
things be done to edifying.” If any one sing, or teach, or speak with
a tongue, let all be done to edifying, so that, eg., if tongues are used,
then let only two, or at the most three, in each assembly speak, and
that in their turns, so that there may be no confusion ; and let one
interpret, so that the hearers may understand what is said.

Ver. 29. — Let the prophets speak two or three, viz., their prophecies
or revealed truths, or intuitions or exhortations inspired into them by
God. See what was said at the beginning of the chapter.

And let the other judge . Let the other prophets, not the people,

Digitized by Google

RULES FOR DIVINE SERVICE

359

judge by the gift they have whether what the prophet or teacher
says is prophecy indeed, that is sound and wholesome doctrine, or
not; for it does not belong to the laity to judge of the doctrines of
religion, as heretics infer from this verse. It would be as absurd
and foolish for the people to judge of prophecies, prophets, teachers,
and pastors as for a scholar to judge his teacher, a sheep its shepherd,
and a soldier his commander.

Ver. 30. — If anything be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the
first hold his peace . Let him rise and speak ; let the first cease and
sit down. S. Ambrose says : “ This is a custom of the synagogue
which S. Paul borrows and enjoins on us. The elders in dignity sit
in their chairs while discoursing , those next to them sit on lower seats ,
the last on mats spread on the pavement. If anything happens to be
revealed to these last, he bids that they be listened to : they are not to be
despised , for they are members of the sa?ne body.”

Ver. 31. — For ye may all prophesy . . . and all may be comforted.
All the prophets can exhort in their turn, if only the method and
order laid down above be observed, and so all can receive exhorta-
tion and consolation. The word for “ may be comforted ” occurs
again in 2 Cor. i. 6. Some take it as active, when the meaning be-
comes, “that all may learn when they hear, and may teach when
they speak and exhort”

Ver. 32. — And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
The prophets can, when they wish, restrain the spirit of prophecy,
and keep silence, and give place to other prophets; they are not
forced to speak by an irresistible impulse, like heathen fanatics ; for,
as S. Thomas says, the spirit or gift of prophecy is not a habit, but is
partly an inspiration, or impartation of light and truth, by which God
illuminates the prophet’s mind in regard to facts that are future,
hidden, or Divine; it is partly a force or impulse by which God
touches the heart and impels it to prophesy, while preserving the
freedom of the will. So Jonah and Jeremiah restrained themselves on
occasion, as did Moses (Exod. iv. 30). S. Chrysostom’s explanation
is different The gift of prophecy, he says, which the prophet has is
subject to the judgment of the College of Prophets ; but the first

Digitized by Google

360 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

sense is more to the context ; for S. Paul is giving the reason why
the prophets ought in turn to give way to each other and be silent,
viz., because the prophetical spirit was under their control.

Ver. 33. — For God is not the author of confusion . He does not
compel these or those to prophesy at the same time, to make a noise
and disturb each other, and so cause such a confusion as is commonly
found in uproarious crowds.

Ver. 34. — Let women keep silence in the churches *. Ambrose, and
after him Anselm, say that even the prophetesses are to keep silence :
(1.) Because it is against the order of nature and of the Law, in Gen.
iii. 16, for women, who have been made subject to men, to speak in
their presence. (2.) Because it is opposed to the modesty and
humility which befits them. (3.) Because man is endowed with better
judgment, reason, discursive power, and discretion than woman. (4. )
She is rightly bidden, says S. Anselm, to keep silence, because when
she spoke it was to persuade man to sin (Gen. iii. 6). (5.) To curb

her loquacity, for, as it is said, “ when two women quarrel it is like
the beating of two cymbals or the clanging of two bells.” This
might readily enough happen in the church if they were allowed to
teach. About this silence enjoined on women, see notes on 1 Tim.
ii. 9. How much is it then against the command of S. Paul, against
all law, right, and seemliness, for a woman to be the head of a church !

Tropologically woman stands for passion and lust, man for reason.
Let the first then be silent and obey the reason. Cf. S. Chrysostom
(. Horn . 37 in Morali. ). Aristotle (de Nat . Animal lib. ix. c. 1) says :
“ Woman is more pitiful and more inclined to tears than man ; also
more envious , more ready to complain , to utter curses , and to revenge ;
she is besides more anxious and desponding than man, more pert and
untruthful \ and more easily deceived?

Ver. 35. — And if they will learn anything , let them ask their
husbands at home . Hence Primasius says that men ought to be well
taught enough to teach their wives in matters of faith. But what if
they are themselves untaught, as is often the case ? Who, then, is
to teach the woman ? Primasius answers that they have preachers,
confessors, and teachers to instruct them. Again, it is better for

Digitized by Google

THE SUBJECTION OF WOMEN

361

them to be ignorant of some things that are not essentials than
to ask and learn about them in public, to their own shame and the
scandal of the Church.

You may say that it is recorded in S. Luke ii. 38 that Anna the
prophetess spoke in the Temple to all concerning Christ. The
answer is that she spoke to all in private, and one by one, not in a
church assembly, nor in the Temple properly so called, for neither
man nor woman, but the priests alone, were allowed to enter the
Temple at Jerusalem. Anna, then, spoke to the women singly in the
court of the women ; for, as Josephus says, the women had a court
distinct from the men’s court.

You may say again, “ Nuns sing in their churches.” I answer that
theirs is not a church in the sense of being an assembly of the faithful,
but merely a choir of nuns. The Apostle does not forbid women to
speak or sing among women, but he forbids it in the common
assembly only, where both men and women meet. In this Cajetan
agrees. Moreover, S. Paul does not allude to such public speaking
as is sanctioned by authority, but that particular and individual
speech which consists in teaching, exhorting, and asking questions.

Add to this that he is speaking of married women only, for he
orders such to keep silence in the church and be subject to their
husbands, and ask them at home what they want to know.

Ver. 36. — What 1 came the word of God out from you ? This is
a sarcasm, concluding what had been said in this chapter and the
preceding. Did not the Churches of Judaea, Samaria, and Syria
believe before you ? Look, then, at the order and custom of those
Churches, whether they are so contentious about their gifts or
make such boasting of their tongues as you do. So Ambrose and
Anselm.

Ver. 37 . — If any man think himself to be a prophet , &c. It is the
Lord who commands this order to be observed in your assemblies,
by my mouth, not directly by Himself.

This verse is an authority for canons passed by the Popes, and
for the laws of the Church.

Melancthon replies that Bishops cannot make fresh canons,

Digitized by Google

362 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XIV.

because, since the whole of the Holy Scripture has been now
written, the Bishops have a full and sufficient guide in the word of
God ; but he says the civil magistrate can pass new laws, because
he has not the word of God to follow.

But this is a frivolous answer. The magistrate has not only the law
of nature, but a very full and complete code of laws in the statute-
book. But if everything has not been provided for there, and the
magistrate may add to the number of laws, why may not Bishops do
the same ? For the word of God has not provided for everything,
as may be seen in the additions made to it by the Canon Law.

Moreover, S. Paul is here enacting human and ecclesiastical laws,
not Divine ones ; and he had besides the word of God, not indeed
written, but received by tradition or revelation from God (GaL L 12),
and that much more fully than we have it If, therefore, it was lawful
for him to add his laws to those given by God, it is also lawful for the
Pope and the Bishops, who have succeeded Paul, to do the same.

Ver. 38. — But if any man be ignorant , let him be ignorant . He
who is not willing to acknowledge these laws and my power will be
ignorant, or ignored or condemned by God, who will say to him,
“ I know you not,” for “ he that heareth you heareth Me, and he
that despiseth you despiseth Me.” Ambrose, Jerome, Ephrem,
read the future, “ will be ignorant.” “ Let him be ignorant ” has a
parallel in “He that is filthy, let him be filthy still;” or, as others
render it, “ He that is ignorant, let him acknowledge himself ignorant,
and behave accordingly, and not presume to pass judgment on
other men, and on things of which he knows nothing, but let him
rather follow others, as leaders in matters of prophecy and doc-
trine.” But I prefer the first reading, that of the Latin Version,
as the plainer, truer, and better supported reading.

Ver. 40. — Let all things be done decently and in order . Like S.
Ignatius (Epp. ad Philipp . et Tars.), S. Paul had a great care for good
order in the Church, especially in things indifferent, both because
this order is beautiful and decent in itself, and because it prevents
confusion and disturbance, and also because it greatly edifies others,
even unbelievers. See notes on Col. ii. 5.

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER XV

3 By Christs resurrection , 12 he proveth the necessity of our resurrection , against
all such as deny the resurrection of the body . 21 The fruity 35 and manner

thereof \ 51 and of the changing of them , that shall be found alive at the
last day .

M OREOVER, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto
you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand ;

2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you,
unless ye have believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that
Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures ;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to
the scriptures :

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve :

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once ; of whom the
greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

7 After that he was seen of James ; then of all the apostles.

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle,
because I persecuted the church of God.

10 But by the grace of God I am what I am : and his grace which was bestowed
upon me was not in vain ; but I laboured more abundantly than they all : yet
not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

1 1 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some
among you that there is no resurrection of the dead ?

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen :

14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is
also vain.

15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God ; because we have testified
of God that he raised up Christ : whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead
rise not

16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised :

17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain ; ye are yet in your sins.

18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.

19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable,
20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them
that slept.

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the
dead.

363

Digitized by Google

364

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order : Christ the firstfruits ; afterward they
that are Christ’s at his coming.

24 Then comet h the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God,
even the Father ; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and
power.

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things
are put under Aim, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things
under him.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also
himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all
in all.

29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise
not at all ? why are they then baptized for the dead ?

30 And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?

31 I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die
daily.

32 If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what
advantageth it me if the dead rise not ? let us eat and drink ; for to-morrow
we die.

33 Be not deceived : evil communications corrupt good manners.

34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not ; for some have not the knowledge of
God ; I speak this to your shame.

35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up ? and with what body
do they come?

36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die :

37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but
bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:

38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his
own body.

39 All flesh is not the same flesh : but there is one kind of flesh of men,
another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.

40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial : but the glory of the
celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another
glory of the stars : for one star differeth from another star in glory.

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption ; it is raised
in incorruption :

43 It is sown in dishonour ; it is raised in glory : it is sown in weakness ; it is
raised in power :

44 It is sown a natural body ; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural
body, and there is a spiritual body.

45 And so it is w'ritten, The first man Adam was made a living soul ; the last
Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural ; and
afterward that which is spiritual

Digitized by Google

SYNOPSIS 365

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy : the second man is the Lord from
heaven.

48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy : and as is the heavenly,
such are they also that are heavenly.

49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image
of the heavenly.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom
of God ; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery ; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be
changed,

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump : for the
trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be
changed.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on
immortality.

54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal
shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is
written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

55 O death, where is thy sting ? O grave, where is thy victory ?

56 The sting of death is sin ; and the strength of sin is the law.

57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus
Christ

58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abound-
ing in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain
in the Lord.

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

He proves the resurrection of the dead against the false teachers who denied it : —
i. From the fact of Christ’s resurrection. Thus (ver. 12) he gives the
bearing of it on our resurrection.

ii He proves the resurrection by the authority of those who are baptized
for the dead (ver. 29).

iiL He declares what the body will be like in the resurrection (ver. 35),
and then names the four endowments of the glorified body (ver. 42).
iv. He shows that we shall all rise again, but shall not all be changed,
and that in the resurrection which shall take place, in a moment,
when the trumpet shall sound, death will be completely swallowed up
(ver. 51).

Ver. 1. — I declare unto you, i.e., recall to your memory.

Vers. 3, 4. — How that Christ died for our sins . . . according to
the scriptures . Hos. vi. 2 : “After two days will He revive us; in
the third day He will raise us up,” i.e,, when He shall on the third
day Himself rise from death to life ; for the resurrection of Christ

Digitized by Google

366 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

was the cause of our rising from the death of sm, and of our future
resurrection from bodily death, so that we are to rise like Christ on
the Judgment Day to everlasting life. See notes on Rom. iv. 25.
So Anselm, Dorotheus, in the beginning of his Synopsis, and also
the Jewish writers of old in Galatin . lib. viii. c. 22. Theophylact,
following S. Chrysostom, says that it was prophesied under an alle-
gory that Christ should rise again on the third day; for Jonah,
brought from the whale’s belly on the third day, was a type of Christ
brought back to life from death and hell on the third day.

Isaac, too, typified the same event, in his being rescued from
death when about to be sacrificed by his father, and restored to his
mother alive and well on the third day. So Christ was given by
His Father and sacrificed, and raised again on the third day. But
these two instances are drawn from the allegorical sense, that of
Hosea is from the literal.

Ver. 5. — Was seen of Cephas . Paul puts this appearance of Christ
first, and therefore implies that the first man that Christ appeared
to was Peter. I say “ the first man,” for He appeared to the Magda-
lene before S. Peter (S. Mark xvi. 9).

Then of the eleven. On the Sunday after the resurrection, when
Thomas was now present, Christ appeared to the eleven, for the
twelfth, Judas, had by that time hanged himself, or better still, “ to
the eleven,” /.<?., to the whole Apostolic College, which then had
been reduced to eleven, Christ appeared on the day of His resurrec-
tion, though Thomas was absent The Greek copies have, “ then of
the twelve.” S. Augustine has the same reading (Quasi. Evangel.
lib. i. qu. ri7), and he says there that, though Judas was dead,
“ the twelve ” were still so called as by a corporate name. So the
Decemvirs are said to assemble if only seven or eight are present.
Chrysostom explains it otherwise. He says that Christ appeared to
the twelfth, Matthias, after His ascension. But this is not recorded
anywhere, and Paul is here naming the appearances of Christ before
His ascension only.

Ver. 6. — After that He was seen of above five hundred brethren.
The Greek word for above means (a) “more than,” (b) “from heaven.”

Digitized by Google

APPEARANCES OF CHRIST

367

Chrysostom and Theophylact take it here in the latter sense. For
Christ appeared, they say, not walking on the ground, but above
their heads, as though descending from the sky ; and He did this
that He might show them that He had ascended as well as risen,
and might confirm their faith in His ascension. Hence any one
may gather that Chrysostom thought that this appearance of Christ
took place after His Ascension; but still it is not true, nor is of
necessity gathered from what Chrysostom says.

This appearance of Christ, whether on a higher spot, as if from
heaven, or in the air, evidently was prior to His ascension ; and
this is the common opinion of doctors ; for we read nowhere of any
public appearance after His ascension.

Many suppose that this was the well-known appearance of Christ
on a mountain in Galilee, which He had so many times promised.
All His disciples met there, as He had bidden. This was not at
His ascension, but before it; for Christ ascended into heaven, not
from Galilee, but from the Mount of Olives. See S. Jerome (ad
Hedibiam , qu. 7).

Ver. 7 . — After that He was seen of James. The son of Alphaeus,
first Bishop of Jerusalem, and styled brother of the Lord. There is
a tradition mentioned by Jerome (Lib. de Scrip . Eccles. in Jacobo)
that James had taken a vow not to eat anything till he should see
Christ risen. S. Jerome, however, does not think the tradition of
any value. Its falsity is seen, too, (1.) for it is evident, from this
passage of S. Paul, that Christ appeared to him after appearing to
the five hundred brethren, and therefore long after His resurrection,
too long for S. James’s fast to have been prolonged naturally. (2.) All
the Apostles, and therefore S. James, were confounded at Christ’s
death, and did not believe in His resurrection. It is not likely then
that James would take such a vow. (3.) S. Jerome says that he
took this story from the “ Gospel according to the Hebrews,” which is
apocryphal. It is also said there that Christ wore at the time a
linen garment, and that He gave it to the servant of the priest,
which also seems false; for the garments of Christ remained in
the sepulchre (S. Matt xxviii.), and a glorified body, such as Christ’s

Digitized by Google

368 FIRST EPISTLE ’TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

was, is not clad with linen or any such garments, but with splendour
and rays of light.

Then of all the apostles , and the disciples as well, says S. Anselm,
at the ascension.

Ver. 8. — And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out
of due time. Born out of due time is, (i.) according to Theophylact
and T’neodoret, contemptible and despised, because young that
come too soon to the birth are generally imperfectly formed, thin,
and undersized. (2.) According to Ambrose and Chrysostom it is
untimely ; that is, after Christ had ascended into heaven, Paul was
born in Christ, and received his Apostleship. (3.) According to
Anselm he thus calls himself, because he was struck to the earth by
Divine power, compelled, and violently bora again : untimely young
are forced into the world by the violence of nature. (4.) Or, as
S. Anselm again remarks, such births are of young half-dead, and
they are often bora blind. So S. Paul was smitten with blindness
at his conversion. (5.) S. Paul was expelled from the womb of his
mother, the people of the Jews, and was sent, not to his fellow-
countrymen, but to the Gentiles outside. (6.) Baronius ( Annals ,
a.d. 44) thinks that Paul was so called as an Apostle, because he
was made an Apostle in addition to the twelve ; for the Senators
at Rome, he says, were so called, when they were co-opted into the
Senate, in addition to the fixed number ; but it cannot be said that
S. Paul alludes to this, for he is writing in Greek to the Greeks,
not to Romans.

It appears from this verse that Christ appeared to Paul, not by an
angel, as Haymo thinks {Comment, on Apocalypse, c. ii.), but in person ;
not in a vision, as He appeared to him in Acts xxii. 18, nor in a
trance, as is recorded in 2 Cor. xii. 2, but in the air in bodily form ;
for it was in this way that Christ appeared to Cephas, James, and
the other Apostles ; moreover, if it were any other kind of appearance
it would be no proof of the resurrection of Christ. The appearance
of Christ alluded to here is the one at Paul’s conversion (Acts ix. 3),
when he saw Christ before the bright light blinded him.

Hence it further appears that Christ then descended from heaven,

Digitized by Google

THE GRACE OF HUMILITY

369

for, as S. Thomas and others say, S. Paul heard the voice of Christ
speaking in the air. Whence it follows again that Christ was then
in two places, in the empyrean and in our atmosphere, close to
Paul; for, according to Acts iii. 21, Christ has never left the highest
heaven to which He ascended. If Christ was then in two places,
why cannot He be at once in heaven and in the Eucharist ?

Hegesippus ( Excid . Hierosol. lib. iii. c. 2) and others say that
Christ appeared in the same way to S. Peter at Rome, when He called
him back as he was flying from martyrdom with the words, “ I go to
be crucified again.”

Ver. 9 . — For I am the least of the apostles , that am not meet to be
called an apostle. Not only the least and unworthy because of my
sins, but not fit for the apostleship ; for it is not meet that one who
was a persecutor should be a leader and Apostle of the Church.

Morally, see the humility of S. Paul in calling himself the least ;
by so doing he was the greatest. S. Bernard ( Serm . xiir. on the
Canticles) says well : “ A great and rare virtue surely is it that you ,
who work great things , do not know your own greatness ; that your
holiness , which is evident to all \ escapes your own observation ; that you
seem wonderful to others , despicable to yourself This f I think , is more
wonderful than your very virtues \ You surely are a faithful servant ',
if of the great glory of God ’ which passes through you rather than
proceeds from you , you let none stick to your hands. Therefore you
will hear the blessed words : * Well done , good and faithful servant ;
because thou hast been faithful over a few things , I will make thee ruler
over many things l ”

Ver. 10 . — I am what I am — an Apostle, and Teacher of the
Gentiles.

His grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain . Not

empty, barren, without results. S. Ambrose reads : “ His grace was
not poor in me,” and then the meaning would be : “ Though I per-
secuted the Church of Christ, yet I did not on that account receive
a grace of apostleship that was poor and slight, and less than that
of the other Apostles, but if anything greater.”

But I laboured more abundantly than they all. S. Jerome (Ep. ad

VOL. I. 2 A

Digitized by Google

3;0 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

Paulinum) says beautifully : “ A sudden increase of heat banishes a
long-existing lukewarmness . Paul was changed into an Apostle instead
of a persecutor ; was last in order, first in merits ; for though last he
laboured more than all.” For, as Gregory says ( Pastor . p. 3, c. 29) :
“A guilty life that has learnt to glow with love for God is often more
pleasing to Him than a blameless life that has grown sluggish front
long security.”

Yet not /, but the grace of God which was with me. It plainly
appears from this passage against Luther and Calvin that man has
free-will, and that God alone does not work everything in us, but
that our free-will co-operates with Him, even in supernatural works,
for the Apostle says with me , not in me , and I laboured more abun-
dantly than they all.

Again, the verb to be supplied in this passage is properly laboured.
Then it will run : u Yet it was not I that laboured, but the grace of
God, which laboured with me.” S. Paul does not here exclude the
co-operation of the will, but only attributes the praise due to the
work to grace as its more worthy cause. But the sense will be the
same if you read with the Greek Fathers and S. Jerome, “ was with me.”
The meaning then is, “ which was with me to help me.” I laboured
much of my own free endeavour, yet I did not so labour as to give
myself all the praise and glory of my labour ; but it was the grace
of God which aroused me, aided me, strengthened me for this labour;
to it, therefore, I give the first and best praise of my labour.”

S. Bernard (“On Grace and Free-will,” subfnem) says: iU Itwas not
/, but the grace of God with me 9 implies that he was not only a mini-
ster of the work by producing it , but in some way a companion of the
worker by consenting to it. Elsewhere S. Paul says of himself 1 We
are workers together with God 7 (1 Cor. iii. 9); hence we make bohl
to say that we merit to receive the kingdom because we are joined to the
Divine Will by the voluntary surrender of our own will.”

See also Anselm, Chrysostom, Theodoret (in loco) ; also Jerome
(contra Pelag. lib. ii.), Gregory ( Morals , xvi. c. 10), S. Augustine
(de Liber. Arbit. c. 17, and Scrm. 13 de Verbis Apost.). He says
there: “ If you were not a worker , God could not be a co-worker .”

Digitized by Google

TIIE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD

371

Ver. 1 1. — Therefore whether it were I or they , so we preachy and so
ye believed. So not only I, but all the Apostles, as was said in
ver. 3, preach and affirm as eye-witnesses, viz., that Christ died, and
rose from the dead, and appeared to us. The Apostle returns here,
as if after a long digression, to the point of the whole chapter,
which is to prove, from the unanimous testimony of the Apostles,
the resurrection of Christ, and of the rest who have died.

Ver. 12. — How say some among you that there is no resurrection of
the dead ? Cerinthus with his followers are meant here. He was the
first heresiarch after Simon Magus to deny, in S. Paul’s time, the
resurrection. See Eusebius (Hist. lib. vii. c. 23, and lib. iii. c. 28)
and Epiphanius (Hares. 28). Cerinthus was a champion of Juda-
ism, and, founding his opinions on Jewish traditions, he referred all
the prophecies about the Church and the Gospel law to an earthly
kingdom, and to riches, and to bodily pleasures. In the same way
he afterwards perverted the meaning of Rev. xx. 4, and became the
parent of the Chiliasts, or the Miliennarian heretics. Some think
from this that he was the author of the Apocalypse, and that it
should therefore be rejected.

S. Ignatius, in his epistle to the Churches of Smyrna and Tralles,
censures this error and its author. Hymenaeus and Philetus (2
Tim. ii. 17) also denied the resurrection.

Ver. 13. — But if there be no resurrection of the dead , , then is Christ
not risen. Not only because Christ was one of the dead, but also
because the primary cause of Christ’s death and resurrection was
the complete destruction of death, and the restoration of life.
Moreover, the resurrection of Christ was a pattern of ours, *.*., of
our resurrection to righteousness in this life, and to glory in the
next. See S. Thomas (p. 3, qu. 53, art 1) for five other reasons
why it was necessary for Christ to rise again.

Ver. 17. — If Christ be not raised , your faith is vain ; ye are yet in
your sins. It rightly follows that, if Christ has not risen, we are
still in our sins; for 1. if Christ has not risen, therefore faith in a
risen Christ, which is the basis of justification, is false ; but a false
faith cannot be the beginning and foundation of remission of sins

Digitized by Google

372 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

and of true sanctification. 2. If Christ remained in death. He
was overcome by it, and His death was ineffectual for the remission
of sins ; for if by His resurrection He could not overcome death,
then He could not overcome sin, for it is more difficult and a
heavier task to overcome this than to overcome death. If this be
so, sin is not fully abolished, if its penalty death is not.

3. The resurrection of Christ is the cause of our justification.
(Rom. iv. 25). Now the cause being removed, the effect is removed.
If, then, the resurrection of Christ is not a fact, neither is our justi-
fication from sins, and consequently we are still in our former sins.

Ver. 18. — Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are
perished , i.e. 9 who have died in faith, hope, and charity. If the
body is not to rise again, but perishes outright at death, the soul
too will perish: it cannot exist for ever without the body, for its
nature is the “ form ” of the body. Unless, then, God take away by
violence from the soul its nature and natural condition, He must
restore to it its body.

Ver. 19. — If in this life only we have hope in Christ. 1. The
word “hope” here signifies, not the act of hope, for this exists in
this life only, but the object of hope or the thing hoped for. If our
only hope in Christ is for the goods of this life, then are we the
most miserable of men ; we are the most foolish also, because we
rely on an empty hope of the resurrection, which is never to happen,
and suffer fastings, mortifications, persecutions, and other hardships,
and we resign the pleasure of the world and the flesh which others
indulge in. Although, then, we are more happy than they, because
of the good that is the fruit of the virtue of abstinence, of charity,
and of an unclouded conscience, yet we are more miserable than
they, so far as our hope in Christ is concerned, nay, we are fools
for relying on a baseless hope. So Anselm and Chrysostom. The
Apostle does not say “we are worse,” but “miserable;” for it is
a miserable thing to afflict ourselves for virtue’s sake, and yet not
obtain the prize ; but the prize of Christian virtue is the resurrection.

It may be said that the soul can have its reward and be blessed
without its body rising again. My answer to this is : God might

Digitized by Google

CHRIST IS RISEN

373

have so arranged things that the soul alone should be rewarded
with the Beatific Vision, but He did not so will it. As a matter of
fact He willed that if the soul be beatified, so shall the body; if
the body is not, neither will the soul ; otherwise Christ would not
have completely overcome sin, which reigns by death over soul and
body alike.

2. It was the opinion of men at that time that if the immor-
tality of the soul be proved, the resurrection of the body must be
at once admitted, because of the close connection between them.
The soul has a natural longing after the body, and cannot exist
without it unless by violence. Therefore the resurrection, so far as
concerns the essence and the needs of human nature, is a natural
process, though its mode of execution be supernatural. Nor can
the soul when once separated be again united to the body by any
created force, but only by the supernatural power of God. Paul,
then, from the denial of the resurrection and happiness of the body,
rightly infers, according to the common opinion of men, as well as
the nature and truth of things, the denial of the immortality and
bliss of the soul ; and so it is no wonder if Christians are not to
rise again, that they should be of all men most miserable.

Ver. 20. — But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the
firstfruits of them that slept (i.) Christ was and is the first of those
that rise again, both in order of dignity and of merit (2.) He was
first in the Divine will and intention. (3.) First causally, for by
Him we shall all rise again. (4.) Temporally, for Christ was the
first in time to rise to everlasting life; for though some before Him
were raised to life by Elijah and Elisha, yet they rose to this mortal
life only, and again died ; but Christ was the first to rise to the
eternal life of bliss and glory. So Chrysostom, Anselm, Ambrose,
Theophylact, Theodoret, and others. The word for firstfruits
properly signifies this, and implies others to follow. So is Christ
called the “ first-begotten of the dead,” i.e., rising before all others,
and, as it were, being bom again from the dead.

It seems from this to be a point de fide that no one rose before
Christ to everlasting life. Those, therefore, who at the death of

Digitized by Google

374 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

Christ are said to have arisen (S. Matt xxvii. 52), rose after Him
in the way of nature, if not of time, for their resurrection depended
on Christ’s as its cause. Francis Suarez points out this (p. 3. qu.
53. art. 3).

The earliest fruit of the earth, which under the Old Law was to
be offered to God, was called the “firstfruits so Christ, after His
resurrection, was offered to God as the firstfruits of the earth, into
which He had been cast as a corn of wheat, and from which He
sprang forth again in the new birth of the resurrection.

Ver. 21. — For since by man came death. Adam brought death on
all men, Christ resurrection. The word since gives the reason why
Christ is called the firstfruits of them that rise, viz., because by
Christ, as a leader of the first rank of God’s army and the subduer
of death, the resurrection of the dead was brought into the world.

Ver. 22. — For as in Adam all die , even so in Christ shall all be
made alive . The question may be asked whether even the wicked
are to rise again and be endowed with life through Christ and His
merits. S. Augustine (Ep. 28) says no, because their resurrection,
being to condemnation, is better called death than life. S. Thomas
also says that Christ is the efficient cause of resurrection to all men,
but the meritorious cause to the good alone.

But my answer is that Christ is the cause of the resurrection
of all, even of the wicked : 1. Because Christ wished by His

resurrection to abolish the power of death over the whole human
race entirely, and therefore the wicked are included, not as
wicked, but as men, abstracting their wickedness. See S. Ambrose
(de Resurr. c. 21), and still more clearly S. Cyril (in Joann, lib.
iv. c. 12).

2. Christ merited resurrection for the wicked, even as wicked,
that He might inflict just punishment on His enemies, that His glory
might be increased by the eternal punishment of His enemies. But
these meanings are beside the scope of the passage. The Apostle
is treating of the blessed resurrection of the saints, not of the resur-
rection of the wicked to misery.

We may here recapitulate the six methods by which the Apostle

Digitized by Google

TESTIMONY TO THE RESURRECTION 375

has proved that Christ rose again, that so he might prove that we
too should rise.

1. From the testimony of those who saw Him alive after He rose,
viz., Peter, Paul, James, the other Apostles, and the five hundred
brethren (ver. 5).

2. If Christ is not risen, then the preaching of the Apostles and
the faith of Christians are alike vain (ver. 14).

3. If Christ is not risen, we are still in our sins. This is proved
by the fact that faith that justifies and expiates our sins is the same
by which we believe that Christ died and rose again for us (ver. 17).

4. If Christ is not risen, then have all perished who have fallen
asleep in Christ, and have been destroyed both in body and soul ;
for the soul cannot live for ever without the body (ver. 18).

5. If we serve Christ only in this short life, and under His law
have no hope of resurrection, then are we of all men most miserable
(ver. 19).

6. By Adam all die, therefore through Christ shall all rise again,
and be quickened. For Christ has done us as much good as Adam
did harm : He came, not only that He might repair all the falls
and loss of Adam and his descendants, but that He might lift us up
to a higher state (ver. 21).

Ver. 23 . — But every man in his own order . 1. According to

Chrysostom, Theodoret and Theophylact this is the just among the
blessed, the wicked among the reprobate. 2. According to the
commentary ascribed to S. Jerome, this means that each shall rise
higher and more blessed as he has been more holy here.

3. CEcumenius and Primasius explain it in this way : All who
are to be quickened in Christ shall rise again in this order — Christ
the first in time and dignity; secondly, the just shall rise; thirdly
shall come the end of the world. This is the Apostle’s meaning, as
appears from the next words. Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 16.

Ver. 24 . — Then cometh the end. 1. The end of the whole dis-
pensation of Christ for the salvation of the human race, and it will
consequently be the end of the age then existing, of time, of all
generations, and all corruptions, and of the universe. So Anselm.

Digitized by Google

376 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

For Christ is the end of the whole universe, and when those that
He has chosen out of it are completed, then the universe will be
ended also.

2. “The end” may, with Theodoret, be rendered “consumma-
tion,” i.e.y the general resurrection of all, even of the wicked, when
all things will come to an end.

When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the
Father . The kingdom is the Church of the faithful and congrega-
tion of the elect ; not as though God did not now reign over it,
for Christ says : “ The kingdom of God is within you ” (S. Luke xvii.
2 1), but because sin has somewhat of power over it, because the
devil, death, and cares that attack mortals are found in it. In
other words, Then cometh the end when Christ shall have presented,
and as it were restored to His Father, the Church of the elect, which
had been intrusted to His care and governance during the struggle
of this life, that He might gloriously reign over it for ever. The
Son shall as it were present it to His Father with the words :
“ Father, Thou didst send Me into the world, and after I ascended
to heaven to be with Thee I have ruled these continuously, and
protected them from the power and assaults of the world, the flesh,
and the devil. Lo, these that I bring are Thine. They are My
possession, given Me by Thee ; they are the fruit of My labour,
won by My sweat and blood. This is Thy kingdom as it is Mine,
and is now free and pure from every sin, temptation, and trouble,
that Thou mayst reign gloriously over it for ever.” Cf. S. Ambrose
and S. Augustine (de Trinitate, lib. i. c. 8 and io).

To God \ even the Father is a hendiadys, to signify that Christ as
man will present His faithful ones to God, as Son to His Father.

When He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power .
When He shall have destroyed the power and dominion of the devils,
so that they shall no longer be able to attack the Church, which is
the kingdom of God. Cf. Eph. vi. 12, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theo-
phylact, Ambrose, (Ecumenius.

Principalities, Powers, and Dominions (the rule , and authority , and
power of A V.) are names of three angelic choirs (cf. Eph. i. 21).

Digitized by Google

THE END OF ALL THINGS

377

It hence appears that some of them fell and became devils, and kept
the same names, just as each kept the same nature, the same order,
rank, and power, especially in their attacks on the Church. S. Paul
says then that, when Christ shall have destroyed all the rule of the
devils, who are and are called Principalities and Dominions, so that
they might no longer attack the Church, He will then hand over the
Kingdom to His Father, and will be the end and consummation of
all things.

S. Augustine (de Trinitate , lib. i. c. 8) explains this passage of
the good angels, and then the meaning will be : There will be no
longer any necessity for the assistance of the angelic Principalities,
Powers, and Dominions, and therefore their dispensation and guid-
ance will be done away with in the Church. But the former meaning
is truer, because the Apostle is speaking of the enemies of Christ, as
is clear from the next verse.

Ver. 25. — For He must reign , till He hath put all enemies under His
feet J.e., Christ must rule the Church till God the Father puts all
the devils and the wicked under Him. Till does not denote an end
of His reign, for there is no doubt that when His enemies shall have
been overcome Christ will reign more truly and for ever, though in
another way and with other glory than now. Cf. S. Chrysostom.
It signifies what may have been done before a certain event, not
what was done afterwards. So Joseph (S. Matt i. 25) is said not
to have known Mary his wife till she brought forth her Son, not as
though he knew her afterwards, as the impure Helvidius insinuates,
but that he did not know her before she conceived and gave birth ;
for S. Matthew merely wished to record a wonderful event that was
naturally incredible, viz., the conception and birth of Christ from a
virgin without a father. So Paul says here that even now, while the
Church is struggling with her enemies, Christ reigns over her. More-
over, it follows from this that Christ will reign after the struggle and
triumph, for S. Paul implies but does not state what is evident to
all. S. Augustine (Sentences, n. 169) well says: “As long as we are
struggling against sins there is no perfect peace ; for those that oppose
us are crushed in dangerous fight, and those that have been overcome

Digitized by Google

378 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

are not yet triumphed owr in the peaceful land where care cannot come ,
but are still kept down by a power that must ever be on its guard ”

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death . That death which
still reigns over the bodies of the saints will be altogether destroyed
at the resurrection. The first enemy of Christ and His followers is
the devil, who was conquered by Christ on the Cross. The second
is sin, which, through the grace of Christ, is being conquered by
Christians in this life. The third is death, which will be the last to
be overcome, and that will be in the resurrection.

Ver. 27. — He hath put all things under His feet God will in the
resurrection put all men and angels, good and bad, under Christ.
He speaks of the future as past, after the manner of the prophets.

But when He saith . . . which did put all things under Him . S.
Paul adds this lest any one should suppose that the Father has given
everything to the Son in such a way as to deprive Himself of autho-
rity over them, for so the Father would be less than the Son and
subject to Him. Sometimes among men, when fathers are getting
old, they make a gift of their goods and offices to their sons, but not
so God.

Ver. 28. — Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him,
Some understand this of His Godhead, as though Christ as God will
show Himself to have received everything, and His very Godhead,
from His Father, and will so declare Himself to His Father. But
this is too bold a statement ; for the Son is not subject to the Father,
because He has all that He has from the Father, but He is equal to
Him in majesty and honour. Hence others often take this passage
of Christ according to His human nature. (1.) With Chrysostom,
He will show His subjection, and so all will see how perfect were
the obedience and subjection of Christ here. (2.) Better, with
Anselm, Christ will be subject as man, t\e., He will subject Him-
self and will offer Himself with His elect to the eternal praise of God,
and to a participation in the Divine goodness, dominion, and glory.
For this subjection of Christ is the same as is alluded to in ver. 24,
where it is said that Christ shall hand over the kingdom to God the
Father, that He may fully and g'oricus’y reign over Him and His

Digitized by Google

SUBJECTION OF THE SON

379

elect. This subjection of Christ and the saints to God is not mean
and servile, but blessed and glorious. For God holds them in
heaven who are subject to Him as sons ; He rules over them, and
blesses them, and makes them happy with the utmost height of glory.
Well, then, is such subjection and service called reigning, and such
service is much to be longed for with David (Ps. lxi. i, Vulg.) : “Shall
not my soul be subject to God ? for of Him cometh my salvation."
On the other hand the wicked, who will not submit themselves to
God, will be by this very fact His enemies, and the most unhappy of
all men. In this very word subject there seems to lurk a double
application; and so Gregory of Nyssa says, in his sermon on
these words : “ Subjection to God is a separation from evil that is
perfect and absolute on every side. Christ shall be subject to His
Father in the resurrection, because in it all the elect and faithful
members of Christ will be clear from all evil, and will receive a
chief part of what is good, and will be most closely united with Deity,
and with its eternity, power, and bliss ; and then will God be all in
all, since there will be no evil in those things that remain ; for God
cannot be in what is evil, but must be in all that is good. Christ
then will be subject to His Father when His Church shall be, and
shall be so set free from all evil ; for the subjection of the Church
is called the subjection of Christ." (3.) The words shall be may be
understood to denote merely a continued action. In other words,
Christ shall persevere for ever in the subjection which He now is
under to His Father. Hilary wrote on this sentence of the Apostle’s
against the Arians ( de Trin . lib. ii.), S. Jerome ( Ep . to Principia ), S.
Augustine (de Trin . lib. i. c. 8), where he says : “ Christ , in so far
as He is God with the Father , has us as His subjects ; in so far as
He is a priest , He is subject even as we to His Father.”

That God may be all in all. Viz., as Anselm says, that God may
have all power over all things and may show that as God He is every-
thing to His elect, or in place of everything else ; that He is our
life, salvation, power, plenty, glory, honour, peace, and all things, and
the end and satisfaction of our desires. So God will rule over all
in all things, and will subject all things to Himself and His glory.

Digitized by Google

380 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

S. Augustine (de Civ . Dei. lib. xxii. c. 9) argues from this verse that
the saints in heaven know our prayers and our state.

S. Jerome (Ep ad Amandum ) appropriately says : “ What the
Apostle means by saying that God shall be all in all is this : our Lord
and Saviour is at present not all in all ’ but a part in each one ,
eg., He is wisdom in Solomon , goodness in David , patience in Job,
knowledge of the future in Daniel , faith in Peter , zeal in Phinehas
and Paul \ purity in John, and other things in other men . But when
the end of all things comes , then He will be all in all \ that each one
of the saints may have all virtues , and Christ may be wholly in each
one and in all.” From this passage S. Augustine says (de Trin .
lib. i. c. 8) that some Christians thought that the humanity of Christ
would reign till the day of judgment, but would then be changed
into His Godhead, and they thought that this change is the subjection
to the Father, of which S. Paul here speaks. This is both foolish
and impossible, according to the faith and to nature.

Some who had given themselves up to the comtemplative life,
and who aimed at an impossible closeness of union with God, and
fanatics, have argued from this and similar passages of Scripture,
that at the resurrection all men and all created things will return to
their Divine archetype as it existed in eternity in God, and so would
have to be changed into God ; that is to say, that then every crea-
ture will have to disappear into the depths of the uncreated being,
i.e.j into the Godhead. Gerson attacks this error at length, and
accuses Ruisbrochius of holding it ; but the latter clears himself
from it, and attacks it in his turn {de Verd Contempt \ c. 19, and
ad Samuel , i. 4).

But this passage of the Apostle’s lends no countenance to this
error, but on the contrary opposes it. For if in the resurrection God
will be all in all, all created things will be in existence stilL Other-
wise God would not be all in all, but only all in none, or in nothing.
Moreover, we can explain by similitudes how God will be all in all
to the blessed. (1.) As a few drops of water poured into a large
cask of very strong wine are at once swallowed up by the wine and
incorporated with it, so the blessed, through love and the beatific

Digitized by Google

GOD ALL IN ALL

381

vision, will as it were lose themselves in God, and seem swallowed
up and incorporated by God as their greatest good, loved above all
things. (2.) As the light of the sun fills all the air, so that it seems
no longer to be air but light, in the same way God will so fill the
blessed with the light of His glory that they will seem to be, not so
much men as gods. (3.) As iron seems to be ignited by fire and
to be changed into fire, so will the blessed be so kindled by their
love and enjoyment of God, that they will seem transformed into
God. (4.) As a large vessel of sugar or honey, when poured into a
little porridge, makes it not only sweet as honey, but as if it were
sugar or honey, so does God by His sweetness so inebriate and
fill with sweetness the blessed that they seem to be very sweetness ;
for God is a sea of sweetness and an ocean of joy and consolation.
(5.) As most sweet strains of music fill the ears of all who hear them
and ravish their minds, or as a diamond, ruby, or emerald fills and
dazzles the eyes of all who look upon it, so does God ravish, delight,
and fill the minds of all the blessed. (6.) As a mirror exhibits, re-
presents, and contains the faces and appearance of everything placed
before it, so that they all seem to exist, live, and move in the mirror,
so do all the blessed live, move, and have their being in God ; for
God is a most bright and glowing mirror of everything.

Lastly, S. Bernard ( Serm . xi. in Cant.) devoutly and beautifully
says : “ Who can understand how great sweetness is contained in the
one short sayings 1 God shall be all in all ? 9 To say nothing of the
body , I see in the soul three things — reason , willy and memory , and these
three are the soul. How much of its integrity and perfection is lacking
to each of these in this present life is known to every one who walks in
the Spirit. Why is this , except that God is not yet all in all ? Hence
is it that the reason is so often deceived in its judgmentSy and the will
weakened by a fourfold disturbing cause, and the memory clouded over
by manifold causes of forgetfulness. To this threefold vanity a noble
creature has been made subjecty not willingly , but in hope. For He
that filleth the desite of the soul with good things will Himself be to
the reason fulness of light, to the will a multitude of peace, to the mem-
ory eternal continuity . O Truth l O Level O Eternity l O Trinity,

Digitized by Google

382 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

blessed and blessing ■ to Thee does my miserable trinity , after a wonder-
ful fashion , aspire , .f/Vk? i/'w a miserable exile apart from Thee . . . .
Put thy trust in God ', for I will yet praise Him , when my reason knows
no error , my will no grief and my memory no fear ; and when we enjoy
that wondrous calm , that perfect sweetness , that eternal security which
we hope for, God , as Truth, will give the first, as Charity the second,
as Power the third, that He may be all in all, when the reason receives
unclouded light , 7 vhen the will obtains unbroken peace, and the memory
drinks for ever of an inexhaustible Fountain . May you see all this,
and rightly attribute it, first to the Son, then to the Spirit, and lastly to
the Father.”

Ver. 29. — Else what shall they dot .. . why are they then baptized
for the dead l 1. This baptism is metaphorical, the baptism of pain,
afflictions, tears, and prayers, which they endure on behalf of the
dead, in order to deliver them from the baptism of fire in purgatory.
For even those Judaisers are baptized who deny the resurrection,
like Cerinthus and others, or, at any rate, their fellow-religionists,
the Jews, and this, according to the faith and custom of the Heb-
rews, who are wont to pray for the dead, as appears from 2 Macc.
xii. 43, and from their modern forms of prayer. This meaning best
fits in with what follows. Baptism is in other places often used
in this sense, (as S. Mark x. 58; S. Luke xii. 50; Ps. xxxii. 6).
Throughout Scripture, waters and waves typify tribulations and
afflictions.

2. “ Baptism” can also be understood of purification before the
sacrifices which were offered for the dead. The Jews were in the
habit of being purified before sacrifice, prayer, or any Divine service.
Cf. S. Mark vii. 9; Heb. vL 12, and ix. 10.

3. The different interpretations of others are dealt with at length
by Bellarmine (de Purgat . lib. i c. 4) and Suarez (p. 3, qu. 56, disp.
50, sect. 1), and they all are referred to literal baptism.

(a) S. Thomas explains it to mean baptism for washing away sins,
which are dead works.

( b ) T’neodoret thinks that “ for the dead ” is “like the dead,” when
they rise from death, viz., when they are baptized, and emerge from

Digitized by Google

BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD 383

the waters of baptism as from the tomb, they symbolise the resur-
rection of the dead.

(c) Epiphanius (Hares. 28) takes “for the dead” to mean when
death is close at hand, and they are looked on as already dead. For
then those who had deferred baptism wished to be baptized in hope
and faith in eternal life and resurrection. Hence those to be bap-
tized used to recite the Creed, in which is the Article, “I believe in
the resurrection of the dead.”

( d ) Claud Guiliaud, a doctor of Paris, thinks that the phrase refers
to the martyrs, who suffer for the faith and the article of the resur-
rection of the dead. This meaning agrees well with the words that
follow : “ Why stand we in jeopardy every hour ? ”

(e) Others refer to a custom which the followers of Marcion after-
wards observed, and suppose the meaning to be that some, in
mistake and out of superstition, received baptism for the dead who
had died without baptism. Cf. Ambrose and Irenaeus (Hares. 28),
Tertullian (de Resurr . c. 24) and Chrysostom.

(/) Chrysostom proffers and prefers another explanation, viz.,
that S. Paul's meaning is : Why do all receive baptism in hope of
the resurrection of the dead, or to benefit their state when dead,
that it may be well with them after death, if the dead do not rise ?
Surely, then, in vain do they do this. But this is not credible, for
the common faith of all the faithful is that they do rise, so much
so, that many of them put off their baptism, even to the end of
life, and are baptized on their death-bed, in the hope that, being
purged by baptism from all pain and guilt, they may fly to heaven,
and obtain a joyful resurrection. Hence we get the name “clinical
baptism.” Many canons are extant ordering that such baptism be
not refused to those who ask for it.

This last meaning seems the simplest of all, and the one most
on the surface, and is taken from the literal meaning of “ baptized.”
Tertullian says that “for the dead” means, “ When the sacrament
of baptism is performed over the body , the body is consecrated to
immortality.”

Ver. 30. — And why stand we in jeopardy every hour l It is folly

Digitized by Google

384 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

for us to expose ourselves to so many dangers and persecutions, in
hope of the resurrection, if there is none. This is a fresh reason,
^ or rather a fresh part of the reason joined to the preceding verse.
That we all shall rise again is evident from the common belief and
instinct of all the faithful, instilled into them both by grace and
nature; for all long for baptism, because of this hope of the
resurrection. Others again, and we especially, because of the same
hope, boldly meet and even attack all dangers and sufferings.
God, therefore, who by nature and grace has given us this feeling
and this courage, through hope of the resurrection, plainly testifies
by this very fact that we shall rise again.

Ver. 31 . — 1 die daily . /<?., I expose myself every day to danger

of death, on behalf of the Gospel and the conversion of the
Gentiles.

By your rejoicing . That is, I die daily for the sake of the glory
which awaits you in heaven, in order that I may win it for you ; or,
better still, as your father and Apostle, I swear, and call God to
witness, by your glory, i.e., by the glorying with which I glory over
you as my children in Christ, that I die daily, and expose myself
to death in hope of the resurrection. Hence S. Augustine ( Ep . 89)
proves the lawfulness of oaihs. [Cornelius k Lapide follows the
Latin Version, which gives glory where the A. V. has rejoicing.]

Which I have in Christ This is, according to Anselm, the
future glory which, in reliance on Christ, I hope that you will have,
or, better, the glory or glorying which I have, i.e., with which I glory
in Christ ; for I glory that by the merits of Christ I have obtained
it. Gagneius and Photius explain the phrase differently, and make
it a protestation rather than an oath, and read it, “ I die daily be-
cause of your” (or, according to some Greek writers, “our”) “glory-
ing ; ” i.e., that I am able to boast of you as having been converted
and won to Christ by my efforts.

Take notice that the Apostle here proves the resurrection of the
body from the immortality of the soul alone, because these two
things are naturally connected, and because men doubted then not
so much the resurrection in itself as the immortality of the soul ; so

Digitized by Google

ST. PAUL’S FIGHT WITH BEASTS 385

that if any one should prove to them the immortality of the soul,
they would at once admit the resurrection. So S. Thomas.

Ver. 32 . — If after the manner of men, (1.) According to Photius, as
far as man could; (2.) better, with human hope only, human courage,
enterprise, love of glory, by which men are for the most part driven
to face dangers. (3.) Others explain it as meaning, “I speak after the
manner of men,” who readily dwell on their fights and conflicts.

I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, Theophylact, Anselm,
Primasius, and Baron ius think that “ beasts ” refers to Demetrius and
his savage companions, wflo fought fiercely and like beasts against
Paul in defence of Diana (Acts xix.). We may then translate it : “ If
I have fought against a man who was as a beast.” So Paul calls
Nero a lion (2 Tim. iv. 17). Such men too are called bulls (Ps.
lxviii. 30); and S. Ignatius, in his epistle to the Romans, says: “I
fight daily with beasts,” i.e. } with the soldiers guarding him.

But Chrysostom, Ambrose, and others think that Paul was actually
thrown to the beasts at Ephesus and fought with them ; for this is
the strict meaning of the Greek, and, moreover, that contest with
Demetrius at Ephesus took place after this Epistle was written ; for
after that outbreak, Demetrius and his followers, by their violence,

forced Paul to leave Ephesus at once, so that he had no time to
write this letter at Ephesus ; therefore it was written before. It is
pretty certain, as Baronius holds, that it was about that time that
this letter was written at Ephesus. The fight with beasts, here
spoken of, was not the one with Demetrius, which had not yet taken
place, but an earlier one.

It may be said, it is remarkable that S. Luke should have said
nothing in the Acts of so important an incident and so fearful a fight.
But it is clear that S. Luke passed over things of no less moment, as,
e.g.y those related by S. Paul himself in 2 Cor. xi. 25 : “Thrice was
I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck,”
&c. Hence Nicephorus (Hist. lib. ii. c. 25) relates, on the authority
of tradition apparently, that this fight of S. Paul’s was a literal fight
with beasts.

Gagneius says that the Greek means, not only to fight against

vol. 1. 2 B

Digitized by Google

336 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

beasts, but to fight against them to extremities, even for life. He
turns it : “ For the defence of the Gospel I was thrown to beasts, and
fought with them to the last breath, and by the help of God I over-
came them, and slew them not with weapons or fists but with faith
and prayer, or I fled from them and escaped them.”

Let us eat and drink ; for to-morrow we die, S. Paul is quoting Isa.
xxii. 13. Those who deny the resurrection or who do not believe it
are not far from the position of the wicked in Isaiah ; for if there is
no resurrection it will be lawful to join with the Epicureans in saying,
“ Eat, play, drink : there is no pleasure after death.”

Ver. 33. — Evil communications corrupt good manners. Viz., with
atheists and unbelievers who deny the resurrection. This is an
iambic senarius of Menander’s, as S. Jerome points out.

Ver. 34. — Awake to righteousness and sin not. Awake from sin to
be righteous. The Greek copies give “ awake righteously ; ” Ephrem,
“Stir up your hearts righteously.” Sin not, because some know not
that God can call the dead to life.

I speak this to your shame. It is a shame for a Christian to have
any doubt about the resurrection or the power of God.

Vers. 35, 36. — But some man will say , , . except it die. The
Apostle strikes here at the root of their disease and the cause
of their error, which was that some were despairing of and deny-
ing the resurrection of the body, because they saw that it rotted in
the ground, and they thought therefore it was incredible and im-
possible for it to be raised again and refashioned. S. Paul here
answers this objection by pointing to a grain of corn which is sown.
It first rots and dies away in the earth, and then as it were is born
again and springs up, and brings forth, not merely one grain, but
many grains from the one. In this way the one grain which is sown
is clothed and laden at the harvest with many ears and grains, so
that it seems to rise with greater glory. In the same way our bodies
will rot in the ground, and thence rise to greater glory.

Ver. 37. — Thou sowest not that body that shall be. When you sow .
you do not sow the body which will rise from the seed, as, e.g., a tree
or an ear, but bare seed of apple, or of wheat, &c., and yet God

Digitized by Google

THE RESURRECTION BODY

387

gives to this seed sown, when it springs from the earth, not any
other seed, but a complete and beautiful body, e.g., of a tree or of an
ear, which is beautifully composed of its own stalk, beard, blossoms,
and grains. Hence S. Augustine says (Ep. 146) that the Apostle
implies, “ if God can add to the new seed something it had not before ,
much more can He at the resurrection restore man's body."

Ver. 38. — But God giveth ... to every seed his own body. He
gives to each seed the body that belongs to its own natural species,
as, e.g ., to a grain of wheat He gives a body of wheat, and not of
barley or of oats.

Ver. 39. — All flesh is not the same flesh. He goes on to prove
what he has said, viz., that God gives to each seed its own body as
He hath pleased and determined. He proves it by analogy. “ God,”
he says, “gives one flesh to man — his own, another to beasts,
another to fishes, another to birds. He gives one body to the
heavens and the stars, and another to things on earth.” So, too,
to the blessed in the resurrection, which will be a kind of regene-
ration and new creation, will God give their own body, such as
He sees fit to give, and such as is becoming to men beatified and
glorified. He will give to each as he had deserved ; for there is a
similitude and proportion between nature and merit. Such a nature
demands such a body ; so such a degree of merit demands a corres-
pondingly glorified body : the less the merit, the less glorified the
body to be received ; the more the merit, the more the glory of the
body.

Ver. 41. — There is one glory of the sun y &c. Chrysostom, Theo-
doret, Theophylact, Primasius, (Ecumenius, Bede, Augustine (de
Sanct. Virg. c. 26), Jerome ( contra Jovinian. lib. ii.), prove from
this that not only is the resurrection of the saints glorious, but that
there is also an inequality of rewards in heaven, just as there is an
inequality in the seeds of merits sown here.

Ver. 42. — So also is the resurrection of the dead. As there is one
brightness of the sun, another of the moon, another of the stars,
so will God give to each of the blessed the blessed and glorious
body that belongs to him, and that is proportioned to his merits.

. Digitized by Google

388 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

The saints and blessed are well compared to stars for reasons
which I have given when commenting on Rom. iv. 18. Moreover,
as one star outshines another, so does one saint in heaven excel
another — as in grace and merits, so in the glory and' reward that he
receives, and “the star of virginity shines among all as the moon
among lesser lights.”

So S. Dominic, while still a boy, appeared to a noble matron in
a vision, wearing on his forehead a bright star which irradiated the
whole world ( Vita, lib. i. c. i, and cap . ult .) ; and it is said of the
high-priest Simon, son of Onias (Ecclus. 1 . 6): “As the morning
star shines in the midst of a cloud, and as the full moon in her
days, or as the noonday sun, so did he shine in the Temple of
God.” Similar things are told us of other saints. Learned men and
teachers of righteousness and holiness will call to mind the verse
(Dan. xii. 3) : “They that be wise shall shine as the brightness of
the firmament, and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars
for ever and ever.” (Cf. Wisd. iii.) Hence Christ, too, says (Rev.
xxii. 16): “lam the bright and morning star,” and in Rev. i. 20:
“The seven stars are the angels” (i.e., the doctors and bishops)
“of the seven churches;” and in Rev. xii. 1, the Church appeared
to S. John like a woman having on her head a crown of twelve stars,
that is of the twelve Apostles, who, like stars, shed their light over
the Church, and that on the head, i.e., in the beginning of the
Church, as Primasius, Aretas, Andrew Bishop of Caesarea, Bede, and
others explain it. Lastly, in Rev. ii. 28, Christ says : “And he that
overcometh, to him will I give the morning star,” i.e., glory and the
beatific vision, which is called a star because of the brightness of
its light and the clearness of the vision. It is called the morning
star, both because it is given after the night of this world, and be-
cause it is the beginning of the blessedness which will be completed
at the resurrection of the body. Cf. Richard Victor, Primasius, and
Aretas.

It is sown in corruption ; it is raised in incorruption . 1. It is sown
in creation, when the corruptible body is produced by the direct act
of God, or from the seed of the father. So Anselm.

Digitized by Google

AN INCORRUPTIBLE BODY

389

2. Better, it is sown a human body when it is buried, and thrown
like seed into the ground to be eaten by worms and changed into
dust; for so grain, when sown in the ground, is cast forth, buried,
and corrupted. So Chrysostom, Ambrose, Anselm.

Hence they have erred who supposed that the resurrection will
take place through the powers of nature, and that we shall rise by
natural strength ; as though in the ashes of the corpse were latent
seminal powers, able to make it rise again. S. Thomas refers to
these men. This is an error opposed to the faith and to true
philosophy, both of which declare that the resurrection is above the
powers of nature. The Apostle does not compare the body to seed
sown in this respect, but he merely points to the fact that, as God
has given to each seed its own body, so that, e.g., wheat springs from
wheat and not barley, so to each of the blessed will He give a body
corresponding to his work and merit That this is his meaning
appears from the following verses. To bring this out more clearly,
S. Paul adduced, in vers. 39 and 40, a similitude drawn from the
difference existing in the flesh and bodies of different creatures.

The seed dying and springing up again, and as it were rising from
death, is a remarkable image and proof of the resurrection. Hence
S. Augustine ( Serm . 34 de Verb . A post) says : “ The whole govern-
ment of this world is a witness to the resurrection. We see the trees at
the approach of winter stripped of their fruits and shorn of their foliage ,
and yet in the spring set forth a kind of resurrection ; for they first of
all begin to shoot forth buds , then they are adorned with blossoms , clad
with leaves , and laden with fruit J ask you who believe not in the
resurrection , Where are those things hidden which God in His own good
time brings forth 7 They are nowhere seen , yet God \ who is Almighty ,
and created them from nothings produces them by His secret power .
Then look at the meadows and fields , which after summer are stripped
of their grass and flowers, and remain nothing but a bare expanse of
ground; yet in the spring they are again clad , and rejoice the heart of
the husbandman when he sees the grass again springing up in newness
of life . Truly, the grass which lived and died again lives from the

seed; so , too, does our body live again from the dust.”

Digitized by Google

3QO FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

Ver. 43. — It is sown in dishonour . Man’s body, when it is
buried and thrown like seed into the ground, is base, thick,
heavy, opaque.

It is raised in glory . It will rise glorious, clear, resplendent. The
Apostle here strikes at another root of their error. There were some
who at that time denied the resurrection of the body on the ground
that the body, as being heavy and fleshy, was unfitted to be the home
of the soul in bliss, and to enjoy the Divine life, as S. Dionysius
testifies when refuting them ( Eccles . Hierarch, c. 7). The Apostle
cuts this away by declaring that to the soul in glory a corresponding
glorified body must be ‘given.

It is sown in weakness. Is weak, slow, inert when it dies and is
buried.

It is raised in power. Powerful, quick, agile.

Ver. 44. — It is sown a natural body. It dies as it lived : its life
was vegetative and sensitive, and needed for its support food and
drink, like the life of other animals. So, too, it was solid, inert,
unable to give place to other bodies, and impenetrable. Such was
the body of Adam, even in Paradise. The natural body is one that
eats, drinks, sleeps, digests, toils, suffers fatigue, is heavy, and offers
resistance to other bodies.

It is raised a spiritual body . 1. Not that the body is to be

changed into a spirit or into an aerial body, as Origen and Euty-
chius, Patriarch of Constantinople in the time of S. Gregory, thought
(he was convinced by S. Gregory and abandoned his error), but
spiritual in the sense of being wholly subject and conformed to the
spirit, so that it no longer stands in need of food or drink, it toils
not, and feels no weariness, but is, so to speak, heavenly and deified,
and, as Tertullian says, is, as it were, changed into the angelic nature.
So S. Augustine (de Hide et Symb. c. 6) says : “ It is called a spiritual
body , not because it is changed into spirit , but because it is so subdued
to the spirit that it is fitted for its heavenly dwellingfilace , when all
weakness and earthly frailty have been taken away , and transformed
into celestial strength ” Yet (c. 10) he seems to say that in the
resurrection the body will not be of the flesh, but like that of angels.

Digitized by Google

A SPIRITUAL BODY 39 1

He retracts this, however, afterwards (Retract, lib. i. c. 17), and more
at length (de Civ . Dei \ lib. ult. c. 5 and 21).

2. Spiritual denotes subtilty, freedom from that heaviness and
solidity that fills space, i.e., from that property of body by which it
so fills space as to exclude all other bodies. The spiritual body
will be subtle, as free from this property, and able, like spirit, to
penetrate and fill all other bodies. Cf. Damascene (de Fide , lib. iv.
c. 28) and Epiphanius (in Hceres . Orig.). For, as God can take
from man his property, viz., the power of laughing, and can take
from fire the heat which is the property of fire, so from body
can He take away solidity, which is the property of natural bodily
substance.

This gift of subtilty, however, will not be a quality infused into the
soul, for this seems an impossibility. It will be an assisting presence
of Divine power, internal to the soul in bliss, so that the soul can, at
its pleasure, lay aside the solidity by which it excludes other bodies,
when it wishes to penetrate into them ; and can, on the other hand,
retain it when it wishes to occupy space and exclude other bodies.
And so this assisting presence of Divine power would appear to be a
gift existing within the soul in bliss, just as the power of working
miracles in Christ came from the presence of God, who thus lent
His help to the humanity of Christ, to enable Him to work miracles
at His pleasure. Cf. Suarez (pt. iii. qu. 54, art 3).

From this place theologians have gathered the four gifts of the
glorified body : (1.) impassibility, from the words, “ It is sown in cor-
ruption; it is raised in incorruption ; ” (2.) brightness, from, “ It is
sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory;” (3.) agility, from, “It is
sown in weakness ; it is raised in power ; ” and (4.) subtilty, from, “ It
is sown a natural body ; it is raised a spiritual body.”

Suarez adds that the “agility” of the bodies of the blessed will
be of such a kind that they will be able to travel in an instant
from one place to another, without passing through the inter-
mediate space; because, they say, it is probable that this is how
angels naturally move. But others, and with greater reason, deny
both. At all events, the mind of man can hardly conceive how

Digitized by Voi.ooQle

392 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

any one can pass from one point to another and yet not cross the
intervening space.

S. Bonaventura (iv. dist 49, part ii. art 2, qu. 1) thinks that these
four gifts are alluded to in Wisdom iii. 7, where it is said: “The
righteous shall shine, and shall run about like sparks in a bed of
reeds.” For he says: “ In the shining we have brightness ; in the
righteousness impassibility , because righteousness is everlasting and
deathless; in the spark , subiilty ; in the running about , agility .
Moreover , ihe number of these four gifts can be arrived at in a twofold
way— from the formal cause and the material but specially the material \
(1.) From the formal : there is in our body a double nature and form —
the elementary , which now holds sway , and the heavenly , which is of
the nature of light, and will be the form\ and complement of our glori-
fied body , and will hold sway in the resurrection . As, then , light, as it
exists in the ray, has these four qualities — the brightness by which it
gives light ; impassibility , which no corruption can touch; agility, from
the rapidity of its flight ; subtilty , which enables it to pass through
transparent bodies without injuring them — so also the glorious body ,
in which the nature of light is predominant , has the same four gifts.
(2.) The number of the gifts is also gathered from the material cause .
Our body is composed of four elements . Since those elements are im-
perfect, it has from them a fourfold defect. From water, an element
that is humid and easily stirred, it has its passibility and corruption ;
from earth it has its opaqueness ; from fire, its animal nature— for a
fire is ever burning within, and hence it neats a constant supply of food ;
from air it has its weakness, for air is changed most easily of all, and
yields to any force, however slight. Since, therefore, these four defects
ought to be removed by the four perfections opposed to them, so as to
make the body perfect, therefore the gifts are four: impassibility against
corruption , brightness against opaqueness, agility against animal nature ,
subtilty or power against weakness ; and this second mode is the more
convenient, for it has the support of authority and reason. Of authority,
for the Apostle says: * It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incor-
ruption 1 — there you have impassibility ; ‘ It is sown in dishonour ; it is
raised in glory 1 — there you have brightness ; ‘ It is sown in weakness ;

Digitized by Google

THE FIRST AND SECOND ADAM

393

it is raised in power' — there you have subtilty ; 1 It is sown a natural
body ; it is raised a spiritual body ' — there you have agility . The Apostle
therefore compares these four gifts to the four defects which they make
good. Similarly , S. Augustine (de Civ . Dei) says; ‘ Our bodies will
know no deformity , no slowness , no infirmity , no corruption. All
deformity will be swalloivcd up in brightness , all slowness in agility ,
all weakness in subtilty , all corruption in impassibility.' "

Ver. 45. — As it is written. 1. These words are, of course, to be
referred to the first part only of the following verse, not to the latter :
“ The last Adam was made a quickening spirit” This last is nowhere
else found in Scripture. S. Paul is merely proving from Scripture
that the body is here sown a natural body, from the fact that Adam,
the father of all men, was made a living soul, and consequently was
an animal, and had an animal body both in death and in life. Hence
by an hyperbaton common in S. Paul, we may read the passage :
“ The first man Adam was made, as it is written, a living soul ”
(Gen. ii. 7).

2. The words, “as it is written,” may be referred, as Theophylact
refers them, to the whole of the following verse, and may be the
explanation and proof of what has just gone before, viz., that if
there is a natural body there is a spiritual body also ; for it is
implied that it is requisite to the perfection of everything that all
kinds of things suppose the existence of their opposites. Where
Scripture, therefore, expressly speaks of a first Adam being made a
living soul, it implies that the second Adam will be a quickening
spirit.

The first man Adam was made a living soul. Adam was made
a soul, an animal, living a vegetative and sensitive life, and

therefore nourished by food and drink, and needing to be preserved
in this his animal life. S. Paul uses a synecdoche.

The last Adam was made a quickening spirit. In order that after
His resurrection He might have a glorious soul to give life to His
body and to make it spiritual, i.e ., glorious like a spirit, independent
of food, impassible, and deathless. His body here, indeed, is ours
as well as His own. S. Paul here again uses a synecdoche, and his

Digitized by Google

394 first epistle to the cor'inthians, c. xv.

meaning is that Christ received a spirit or soul, able to quicken
Himself and His members.

Theophylact, Chrysostom, and Theodoret remark that S. Paul
does not say a “living spirit,” but a*- “life-giving spirit;” for the
soul or spirit of Christ does not merely enjoy life itself, but also
gives life to others, and the life which He gives glorifies both our
souls and bodies.

Ver. 47. — The first man is of the earthy earthy: the second man is
the Lord from heaven . The Vulgate reading here is “ the second
man is of heaven, heavenly.” This was corrupted into “the second
man is the Lord from heaven ” by Marcion, as Tertullian proves
{contra Marcionem i lib. L c. 5). The Latin rendering, therefore, is
the more genuine.

Valentinus and the Gnostics gathered from this passage that
Christ had not a material and human body, but that He brought
from heaven a heavenly one, and passed through the Blessed Virgin,
not as her child, but as rain-water passes through a pipe. This is
a heresy long ago condemned, as S. Augustine testifies {Hares, n),
and Irenaeus {lib. i. c. 5), and Tertullian {de Came Christie c. viii.).

1. Bede rightly says : “ Christ is called heavenly , because He led a
heavenly life and was always without sin ; Adam is called earthy
because he was subject to sin.” Hence there follows : “ As is the
earthy,” &c.

2. Christ is called heavenly because He was conceived and bom
of the Virgin by the heavenly power of the Holy Spirit, above the
ordinary course of nature. S. Ambrose, S. Hilary {de Trin . lib. i.),
S. Augustine {Dial, ad Orosium , qu. 4).

3. Christ is called heavenly by reason of His Divine and heavenly
substance. In the same way He is called the Son of man, i.e., the
Man who came down from heaven (S. John iii. 13). See Gregory of
Nazianzen {Oral. 51) and Augustine {Ep. 57 ad Dardanum).

4. The most natural sense in which Christ is called “ heavenly ”
is that He is glorious and incorruptible, like the inhabitants of heaven.
This celestial glory Christ had substantially in His soul from the
moment of His conception. He had it, too, in His body, because

Digitized by Google

THE HEAVENLY BODY

395

it was His due, and was natural to His body ; but its manifestation
was suspended and postponed, on account of His Passion, in order
that He might assume it in His resurrection. Yet even before His
death, Christ now and then assumed this glory, or the four gifts of
the glorified body, viz., brightness in His transfiguration, agility when
He walked on the sea, subtilty when He penetrated the womb of
His mother, impassibility in the Eucharist. On the other hand,
Adam is called “ earthy ” because he was formed from the earth, and
hence and from sin contracted mortality, and the other qualities of
an earthly, animal, mortal, and corruptible body. So S. Chrysostom,
Augustine {de Civ . Dei, lib. xiii. c. 23), Tertullian {de Resurr. c. 49) ;
for the Apostle is speaking here of the resurrection, and the glory
of the bodies of the blessed, the pattern of which is the glorified
body of Christ, and hence he calls Christ heavenly, and His body
heavenly also.

Ver. 48. — As is the earthy , such are they that are earthy . As Adam
was formed from the earth, was earthy, and died, and returned to the
earth, so also all the earthy born from him shall return to the earth.

As is the heavenly , such are they also that are heavenly. As Christ
by His resurrection obtained a body that was heavenly, i.e., immortal
and glorious, so too do the saints who are bom again of Him become
heavenly, i.e., immortal and glorious.

Ver. 49. — As we have borne the image of the earthy we shall also
bear the image of the heavenly. The Latin reading is, “let us bear.”
If we adopt the future, “ we shall bear,” the reference will be to the
resurrection, when we shall be fashioned like to Christ in His glorious
body, as in this world we were made like Adam in having a life that
needed food, sleep, &c., and that was subject to death. The Latin
reading, “let us bear,” is in consonance with the practice of the
Apostle, who frequently passes on to enforce a precept in this way.
The meaning then is : As we sometime lived in unbelief and in sin,
as earthly men, intent on the earth and living an animal life, like the
brutes that perish, even as Adam did, who was of the earth and sinful,
so, now that we have been bom again into Christ, and called by Him
to a fellowship of immortal life and glory, let us endeavour with ail

Digitized by Google

396 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, c. XV.

our might to attain it, and consequently let us bear the image of the
heavenly Christ, that we may enter on this heavenly life here, viz.,
(i.) let us be, as He, impassible, i.e., undisturbed by prosperity or
adversity, so that we can say with Socrates, “ I have climbed up into
heaven in mind : this lower sun and soil I now despise (2.) let us
be bright like Christ, that our good works may shine before all men ;
(3.) let us be agile like Christ, apt to works of charity, of obedience,
and of other virtues ; (4.) let us be subtle, as was Christ, i.e., let us
cleave the skies by prayer and meditation, that having ascended from
the earth to heaven and to God in heart and mind, we may be joined
to the saints and united to God. S. Cyril ( de Fide ad T/ieodos.)
interprets it a little differently. He says : “As we bear the image of
the earthy , let us also bear the image of the heavenly . The image of
the earthy is our propensity to sin and the death which follows it
The image of the heavenly , i.e., of Christ is His constancy in holiness ,
and a return and renovation from death and corruption to life and
immortality”

S. Bernard beautifully explains these words of the Apostle ( Serm .
30 inter Parvos). He says : “ There are two men , the old and the new.
Adam is the old man , Christ is the new . The one is earthy , the other
heavenly. The image of the one is our former state , of the other our
newness of life . Each of these is threefold. Our former corruption was
in heart , in mouthy and in body , in which we sinned in three ways , in
thought , word and deed . In the heart there are earned and worldly
desires , the love of the flesh and the love of the world ; in the mouth is
a double evil, boasting and detraction ; in the body degrading vices and
disgraceful crimes. All these are the image of the old man , and all these
are to be renewed in us. . . . Dwelling in the heart is wisdom, in the
mouth is truth, in the body righteousness.”

Ver. 50. — Now this I say, brethren , that flesh and blood cannot inherit
the kingdom of God.

(1.) Origen and Euthymius explain this as follows, that in heaven
the blessed will not have a body of flesh but an etherial body. But
thi^is a manifest error, and opposed to ver. 53, as we shall see.
(2.) Theophylact and Ambrose say that the flesh, or the works of the

Digitized by Google

THE GENERAL RESURRECTION

397

flesh, will not inherit the kingdom of God. But (i.) The natural
meaning is that natural and corruptible flesh and blood, such as the
earthly Adam had and such as we have in this life, will not inherit
the kingdom of God. What the Apostle, in vers. 46, 47, called
natural and earthly, he here calls flesh and blood. He merely wishes
to point out that in heaven the body will not be as here, natural and
earthly, but spiritual and heavenly, in the sense that I have explained
(ver. 47). This is why he adds, “neither doth corruption,” *.*.,
corruptible flesh, “ inherit incorruption.” Cf. Theodoret, Theophy-
lact, Ambrose. (2.) The Apostle leaves it to be collected from t{iese
words that in heaven there will be no carnal and animal life, con-
sisting in the use of food and generation of children, such as the
Jews and Mahometans look for at the resurrection. (3.) He implies
that those who are striving for the kingdom of God ought not to live
after the flesh, but after the Spirit of Christ, that so they may bear the
image, not of the earthly and carnal Adam, but of the heavenly and
spiritual Christ ; then they will merit to reign with Christ, and to
live a life of bliss in heaven. “ Flesh ”often stands for the corruption
of the flesh. Cf. Augustine { Ep . 146 ad Consentium).

Ver. 51. — Behold 9 I show you a mystery . Theophylact says that
by these words the Apostle wishes to arouse the attention of his
readers, and to point to some great, dreadful, and hidden fact about
the resurrection.

We shall all indeed rise again , but we shall not all be changed.
There are three variant readings here, the first that of the Greek
Fathers and of Ephrem, “ We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be
changed.” This is adopted by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact,
Origen {contra Celsum } lib. ii.), Theodoras, Heracleotes, Apollin-
arius (quoted by S. Jerome, Ep. ad Minerium et Alexandrum ),
Tertullian {de Resurr. Camis 9 c. 41 and 62), Augustine (qu. 3, ad
Dulcitium), who think that all will not die, i.e. y that some who are
alive at the end of the world will be caught up with Christ the Lord,
and so will be glorified. For this change, Theophylact says, follow-
ing Chrysostom, will be to them death ; for corruption will die in
theitr by being changed into incorruption,

Digitized by Google

398 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

The second reading is, “ We shall all sleep, but we shall not all be
changed. This appears in S. Augustine (de Civ . Dei y lib. xx. c. 20),
and is approved by S. Jerome in the passage above quoted. The
third reading is that of the text. S. Augustine prefers this to the
others given above, and it is undoubtedly plainer, truer, and more
certain, and more consistent with the context and with the other
passages of S. Paul’s, in which he lays down that it is appointed
unto all men once to die. C£ also ver. 22 : “As in Adam all die.”

Though the first rendering does not appear to be true, yet,
because of the authorities in favour of it, it is not to be condemned
as rash or certainly false. Hence Franciscus Suarez and others say
that the opinion that all men, without a single exception, will die
and rise again is only more probable than its opposite.

Ver. 52. — In a moment We shall rise in an instant, in a point of
time, so short as to be indivisible, as S. Jerome says.

In the twinkling of an eye. The word for “twinkling” is derived
from the hurling of a thunderbolt or a javelin. Others, with S.
Jerome ( Ep . ad Menerium) y read another word, which denotes the
instant fall of the balance when a heavier weight is placed in one
scale. Cf. Wisd. xi. 23.

Theodoret, (Ecumenius, Anselm, Gregory of Nyssa ( Oral '. de
Resurr .), S. Jerome (in the passage just quoted), Augustine (Ep. 49,
c. 1) gather from this that the resurrection will take place, not in a
very short space of time, but instantaneously. This may be true of
the formation, organisation, and re-vivification of the body when it
rises, and indeed the Apostle says as much when he writes “ in a
moment,” but it is very doubtful whether it refers to local motion,
as to the coming together of the different parts of the body from
different places. S. Augustine maintains, and Suarez (part iii. qu.
53, disp. 44, sect. 4) shows that it is possible that by the power of
God these different parts of the body can pass from point to point
without travelling over the intermediate space, and that so all can
at once come to the same place, in a moment of time. But, as was
pointed out at ver. 44, the nature of space and of motion does not
seem to allow of that, but rather to force us to admit that nothing

Digitized by Google

THE RESURRECTION OF THE BODY 399

can pass from one place to another without crossing over the space
between.

Hence it seems to others more likely that by the power of God
motion may take place in an instant from one point to another by a
passage over the intervening space, as the sun uniformly pours his
light in every direction over half the world in a single instant Why
should it not be said that the body can in the same way, by the
power of God, dart itself from one place to another? If one is
instantaneous, why may not the other be ?

But it may plausibly be answered that there is a great difference be-
tween the nature of light and of material bodies ; for though the mode
of travelling of both may seem the same, yet in the case of light it
is not the same point of light that is carried continuously onward,
but point succeeding point ; but in the case of a body it is the same
identical body that in one instant has to leave one Space and pass
through the next, and in the self-same instant leave that and pass
through a third, and a fourth, fifth, and sixth, and so on, through all
the intermediate spaces to the end. But this seems impossible;
for if so, in the same instant the same body would be crossing
through and leaving the same space, would be in this space and
not be in it, nay, would be in all the intervening spaces and would
not be in them. Hence S. Thomas and others are better advised
in denying that this transference of the parts of the body to the
same place will take place instantaneously, especially since it will be
brought about by the ministry of angels, who move bodies, not
instantaneously, but in a very brief space of time. The Apostle then
is speaking here of the resurrection alone, not of the transference of
the risen bodies, when he says that it will take place in the twinkling
of an eye, even in a moment.

At the last trump . From Rev. viii. and ix. it appears that,
at the end of the world, the seven angels to whom the care of
man has been wholly given will sound with seven trumpets, to
announce the last calamities and punishments which are coming
on the world, and as it were to call them forth and to bring them
to pass. After them there will follow this last trumpet, calling

Digitized by Google

4C0 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XV.

out, “Arise, ye dead, and come to judgment” See notes to
i Thess. iv. 1 6.

Ver. 53. — For this corruptible must put on incorruption. The
word “this” declares, in opposition to Origen, that the resurrection
body will be numerically the same as now. Cf. S. Jerome ( Ep . ad
Pammachium).

Ver. 54. — Then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written ,
Death is swallowed up in victory . This is either from Isa. xxv. 8,
where S. Paul follows the Hebrew text rather than the Septuagint,
or the sense and not the words of Hosca xiii. 14 is given. This seems
preferable, as ver. 55 seems to be taken from the same place.

Ver. 55. — O death , where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy
victory ? This question received its first answer when Christ rose
and brought back from their limbus the souls of the saints, and so
rescued this part of His spoil from Hades. Cf. Anselm and Origen
(, Horn . xxii. in Evangl), and Augustine ( Sernu 137 de Tempore ).
The final answer will be given at the resurrection of all, as the
Apostle says here. S. Jerome, writing to Heliodorus about Nepotianus,
lately dead, beautifully addresses Death, and exults over it with S.
Paul. He says : “ By Hosea He formerly sternly threatened thee : 1 0
death , I will be thy plagues ; O grave , I will be thy destruction.' By
His death thou now art dead; by His death we live . Thou hast
devoured and been swallowed up, and when thou wast tempted with
the bait of the body assumed by Christ, and thoughtest it a prey meet
for thy greedy jaws, thou wast straightway pierced within by the barbed
hook. We, Thy creation , give thanks to Thee, Christ our Saviour, that
when Thou wast slain Thou didst slay this our powerful foe."

Similarly, S. Francis, when suffering from the most grievous bodily
pains, found no relief but in singing the praises of God and in hear-
ing others singing them ; and, when he was reproved by Elias for
devoting his last moments to joy instead of to repentance, he replied
that it was not right for him to do otherwise when he knew that in a
short time he should be with God. S. Reginald, one of the first
companions of S. Dominic, when bidden prepare himself, according
to custom, by extreme unction, for his contest with the devil, said :

Digitized by Google

VICTORY OVER DEATH

401

"7 have little fear of that contest ; nay, rather, I joyfully look forward
to it; for long ago was I anointed by the mother of mercy : in her
I put my utmost confidence, and set out to her with eagerness 7 S.
Bernard ( Serm. 26 in Cantica ), speaking of the death of his brother
Gerard, who in his last moments had broken out in the words of the
Psalmist, “ Praise the Lord of heaven ; praise Him in the height,”
wrote as follows : " On thee, my brother, though it was still midnight,
day was dawning; the night was as bright as the day . I was sum-
moned to behold that marvel , to see a man rejoicing in death , taunting
death: 1 0 death, where is thy sting ? O grave, where is thy victory V
There is no longer a sting, but a shout of victory. Man now dies sing-
ing, and in singing dies”

Ver. 56. — The sting of death is sin. Theophylact says that the
sting by which death chiefly hurts and pierces us is like the sting of
the scorpion, which, though a tiny animal, slays by its sting. So death
slays all by sin, and would be powerless without sin. Moreover, death
stings and pierces us by sin and by knowledge of sin as his sting,
saying to the soul, as it were : “ You die; you suffer deservedly, because
you have sinned.”

The strength of sin is the law. Sin gains its strength chiefly through
the law. The prohibitions of the law are the occasions of sin, for we
always strive after what is forbidden and long for what is denied us
Cf. notes to Rom. viii. 8 and 13. Cf. also Theodoret, Theophylact,
Ambrose, Anselm.

Ver. 57. — Thanks be to God who giveth us the victory. I.e., over
death and sin.

Ver. 58. — Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable.
Viz., in the belief of the resurrection, that ye may abound in good
works well pleasing to God, stirring up yourselves to them by the
hope of the resurrection and of the eternal reward, knowing that
your labour will not be in vain, or without its reward with the Lord.
This is the force of the phrase, “ in the Lord.”

vol. 1 .

2 c

Digitized by Google

CHAPTER XVI

I He exhorteth them to relieve the want of the brethren at Jerusalem . io Com-
mendeth Timothy , 13 and after friendly admonitions , 16 sheet feth up his
epistle with divers salutations .

N OW concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the
churches of Galatia, even so do ye.

2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as
Cod hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

3 And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve b y your letters, them will I
send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

4 And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me.

5 Now I will come unto you, when I shall pass through Macedonia : for I do
pass through Macedonia.

6 And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you, that ye may
bring me on my journey whithersoever I go.

7 For I will not see you now by the way ; but I trust to tarry a while with
you, if the Lord permit.

8 But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost

9 For a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and there art many
adversaries.

10 Now if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear s for
he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do,

1 1 Let no man therefore despise him : but conduct him forth in peace, that he
may come unto me : for I look for him with the brethren.

12 As touching our brother Apollos, I greatly desired him to come unto you
with the brethren : but his will was not at all to come at this time ; but he will
come when he shall have convenient time.

13 Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.

14 Let all your things be done with charity.

15 I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the
firstfiruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of
the saints,)

16 That ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us,
and laboureth.

17 I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for
that which was lacking on your part they have supplied.

18 For they have refreshed my spirit and yours: therefore acknowledge ye
them that are such.

40a

Digitized by Google

COLLECTION FOR THE SAINTS 403

19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in
the Lord, with the church that is in their house.

20 All the brethren greet you. Greet ye one another with an holy kiss.

21 The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.

22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema
Maran-atha.

23 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

24 My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen.

Ver. 1. — Now concerning the collection for the saints. The saints
here meant were the poor Christians living at Jerusalem. C£ ver. 3
and Rom. xv. 26. For the Christians at Jerusalem, as appears from
Heb. x. 34, were robbed of their goods and grievously harassed by
their fellow-countrymen, who were the most bitter foes of Christ
Hence an injunction was given to S. Paul in the Council of Jeru-
salem to be as mindful of the poor Jews as of the Gentiles (Gal
ii. 10). He orders, therefore, that alms be regularly collected for
them ; and this practice lasted till the time of Theodosius. Cf. 2
Cor. viii.

Ver. 2. — Let every one lay by him in store — the amount that he may
wish to give at this collection on the Lord’s Day. The first day of
the week was the day on which the faithful assembled in church and
made their oblations, even as they do now ; for from this passage it
is evident that, by Apostolic institution, a collection was wont to be
made on the Lord’s Day. When this custom had been discontinued
at Constantinople, S. Chrysostom had it restored, and delivered a
remarkable sermon on almsgiving and collections at the time. Again,
S. Chrysostom well remarks that it was well ordered that the collec-
tion should take place on the Lord’s Day, for on it God created the
world and re-created it when lost, when Christ rose on the first day
of the week and sent His Holy Spirit on the same day ; and, there-
fore, we should keep in mind the great mercy that we have received
on that day, and be merciful and liberal ourselves to others who are
in need.

Moreover, it appears from this verse, that in the time of the
Apostles the Sabbath had given way to the Lord’s Day, and that
is evidently implied by S. John (Rev. i. 10), when He says: “I was

Digitized by Google

404 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XVI.

in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day.” Moreover, it follows secondly, in
opposition to the Protestants, that even unwritten traditions are
to be observed, for Scripture nowhere orders the Lord’s Day to be
kept instead of the Sabbath.

S. Thomas and Cajetan think that each one of the faithful is
here bidden to lay by at home, each Lord’s Day, his offering, and
give it in the church, not on that day, but later on, when it was
to be sent to the poor of Jerusalem, But the practice of the
Church shows that the opposite is meant, viz., that the oblations
should be offered at the altar each Lord’s Day, and the same thing
is shown by the words that follow, “that there be no gatherings
when I come.” He wishes, then, these offerings to be put by
each Lord’s Day, before the supper and the agape, and then, when
the Eucharist was celebrated in the church, to be collected as
alms. Notice that “to lay by in store” is in Greek “to treasure
up,” for he who treasures up for the poor lays up treasure for
himself in heaven.

Ver. 3. — I will send your liberality to Jerusalem . (Ecumenius
points out that he does not here speak of alms, as he might truly
have done, because the name of alms is degrading and insulting to
the saints who were to receive them, but he uses a more polite
term — liberality, kindness, blessing.

And if it be meet that I go also they shall go with me. S. Paul
stirs up the Corinthians by these words to make a larger collection,
one large enough to be fit for him to take.

Ver. 8. — 1 will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost \ Viz., because at
Ephesus was the famous temple of Diana, and because the chief
men of Asia Minor lived there. Hence the Proconsul of Asia
Minor resided at Ephesus, and, as Philostratus says ( Vita Apollonii \
lib. viii.), learning flourished there most; and, therefore, there was a
greater harvest for S. Paul, and this was what determined him to stay
so long there.

Ver. 9. — A great door ... is opened unto me. A great oppor-
tunity of preaching the Gospel and of converting many. So
Ambrose.

Digitized by Google

PRACTICAL DIRECTIONS

405

Ver. 14. — Let all your things be done with charity . This, ac-
cording to some, is not supernatural charity, but the sincere
affection which penitents or even unbelievers can possess. But
this is not the charity which Scripture and S. Paul commend to
the faithful, but merely such natural love as pagans have. The
sense properly speaking is therefore: “Do all your works, O
Corinthians, not from ambition, nor from contention or schism,
as I told you in chaps, ii. and xiv., but in Christian charity, which
is a Divine virtue infused into you by Christ” This is partly a
precept, partly a counsel of perfection, as was pointed out in the
notes to chap. x. 31.

Ver. 15. — I beseech you, brethren t &c. Theophylact arranges this
verse and the next in this way : I beseech you, brethren, that ye
submit yourselves to Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaiacus, and to
every one that works with them and labours ; for ye know their house
(i.e.y houses or families), that they are the firstfruits of Achaia
(viz., that they were the first in Achaia to believe on Christ), and
that they have devoted themselves and all that they have to the
ministering to the saints (/.*., in showing hospitality to needy
Christians and to strangers, and especially those who labour in the
Gospel). The submission enjoined here would consist in showing
honour, and in following their exhortations and good example. The
fellow-labourers are those who helped the men mentioned above
in their Christian work.

Ver. 17. — I am glad of the presence of Stephanas , and Fortunatus,
and Achaiacus . (1.) According to Anselm this presence means the
presence of these men with the Corinthians to supply, teach, and
strengthen them in the faith. (2.) According to Theophylact it is
the presence of these men with S. Paul, to supply him with what
he needed for his ministry from their own resources, and so to help
forward the cause of Christ. This is undoubtedly S. Paul’s meaning,
and suits better with what follows.

Ver. 18. — For they have refreshed my spirit and yours . What re-
freshes me refreshes you. Theophylact thinks that these men were
so warmly commended to the Corinthians, to prevent them from

Digitized by Google

40 6 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XVI.

being treated coldly or severely for having brought to S. Paul news
of the divisions and backslidings of the Corinthians.

Ver. 22. — If any man lerve not the Lord Jesus Christy let him he
Anathema. “ Anathema ” denotes anything separated by a curse,
thrown away, and destined for utter destruction. In the case
of men it denotes, therefore, eternal damnation. These are not
words of excommunication merely, but of cursing, and of denunci-
ation of eternal damnation against unbelievers and all who love
not Christ Cf. notes on Rom. ix. 3. Next to “anathema” was
reckoned “katathema,” which was a term applied to those who
allied themselves to persons under condemnation. Hence Justin
(qu. 1 21) says: “ * Anathema’ denotes anything laid aside and set
apart for God } and no longer put to common uses , or what has been
cut off from God because of its idee or guilt. ‘ Katathema ’ is applied
to those who consent to men under anathema , or who devote themselves
to the gods belou

Maran-aiha. This is properly two words. Erasmus thinks it is
the same as “ anathema,” and he compares with its use here, “ Abba
Father.” But he is mistaken: the words are Hebrew-Syriac, and
signify, “The Lord has come.” The first part is still in common
use among the Christian churches of India and Babylon, which
look to S. Thomas as their founder, and is applied to their bishops,
as Mar Simeon, Mar Joseph, &c. But what has the phrase, “ the
Lord has come,” to do with the context here? Chrysostom and
Theophylact say that S. Paul uses this word in order to point to
Christ’s coming in our flesh, and His charity, to stimulate us to
endeavour to come to every degree of virtue, and, as S. Jerome says,
to hint that it is foolish to contend any longer by wanton hatred
of one another against Him who, as every one knows, has now
come. S. Chrysostom says, further, that the reason why S, Paul
denounces anathema against those who love not Jesus is, that He
has now come in His humility to save, so that there is now no
excuse for not loving Him; for the Incarnation and Passion of
Christ so win our love that the man who does not love Him is
unworthy of pardon.

Digitized by Google

MARAN-ATHA

407

But this explanation seems too forced. Notice, then, that “ Maran-
atha” is a Syro-Hebraic phrase, which, with Amen, Hosanna,
and Alleluia, has been transliterated into other languages. Cf.
S. Jerome ( Ep . 137 ad Marcellani) and S. Augustine (. Ep . 178).
And so S. Paul adds here, after “Anathema,” “ Maran-atha,” be-
cause the Hebrews, when passing sentence on any one, were in
the habit of invoking the Divine justice to confirm their own. Cf.
Dan. xiii. 55 and 59 (Vulg.), and Ps. ix. 19. It is, then, a prayer :
“May the Lord come as Judge to punish him who loves not
Christ”

Notice again that by a euphemism the Hebrews commonly let
this punishment be understood. Their usual formula is, “ May God
do so to me and more also,” without specifying the particular form
of punishment that they wish to call down on themselves if they
break their oath. They do this out of reverence for an oath, and
from the fear that the curse, if openly expressed, may fall upon them
in some way, just as among us now-a-days, when any one is enraged
and falls to cursing, or calling down on his friend some dreadful
disaster, he will by-and-bye add : “ God avert this 1 ” “God forbid it ! ”
“God protect us!” Similarly, when it is here said, “The Lord is
coming,” or, “May the Lord come,” supply “to judgment,” viz., to
inflict everlasting punishment on unbelievers and the enemies of
Christ. Anselm says: “ If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ ,
as His first coming is of no use to him, so neither will His second
coming to judgment be .” The explanation of Titelman is the
same: “Let him be anathema in the coming of the Lord to judg-
ment.” S. Clement, too, seems to interpret “ Maran-atha ” in the
same way (Ep. 2 in Fine ), when, in allusion to this passage, he
says : “ This, my brother James, have I heard enjoined by the mouth
of S. Peter: * If any one keep not these precepts entire, let him be
anathema till the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.' ” What else
explains these last words but the “ Maran-atha ” of SS. Peter and
Paul?

S. Paul refers here to the last verse of the prophecy of Malachi,
“lest I come and smite the earth with a curse,” and primarily to the

Digitized by Google

408 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, C. XVI.

Book of Enoch, quoted by S. Jude in his epistle (vers. 14 and 15) :
“ Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousand of His saints, to
execute Judgment upon all, and to convince all that are un-
godly,* &c.

Ver. 24 . — My love be with you all in Christ Jesus . May the love
that I bear you flow back to me and towards each other for Christ’s
sake.* Amen.

Think of eternity — Anathema Maran-atha !

END OF VOL I.

Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & Co.
Edinburgh and London

Digitized by Google

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The Great Commentary Of Cornelius À Lapide: I Corinthians, Volume 7"

See other formats